Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
Yeah, I'm sure theyre all just absolutely shocked Kanye doubled down on the Nazi shit yet again.
Shopify when this happened: No comment.
Shopify after blowback: This is an abhorrent abuse of our policies! We are all adither!
In conclusion: Fuck Shopify. And obligatory fuck ICE.
Actually they fully allow the sale of explicit Nazi merch at Shopify. They just came up with a vaguely plausible excuse to get rid of Kanye's store specifically. The execs at Shopify are outspoken extreme right wingers. These are guys get along well with the Proud Boys (which is considered a terrorist group in Canada).
He still had a TA after the last nonsense? Who is that TA and wtf is wrong with them?
Money. Money is what was wrong with them.
Good riddance.
Let this be his only legacy.
I worked with someone who defended Kanye for like a year after he went publicly apeshit. Probably up until at least 2019 when I last spoke to him on the topic. He just kept claiming that it was so unfair that Kanye was getting judged as an off-meds mentally ill person suffering. Which I would get, as long as he wasn't hurting other people. But that's been the motherfucker's raison-etre for a while now.
Would they extend anyone else dealing with untreated mental illness the same benefit?
I thought that kind of attitude was normal to have. I don't think my literally insane coworker is an evil person just because the voices in his head tell him to be racist
Likely. Not sure.
Well now there's a ten dollar word if I've ever seen one.
Slips scrabble back to the top...
Dang I misspelled it. Raison d'etre, from French, meaning "reason for being". Probably couldn't use it in Scrabble.
Don't tell me what I can and can't do. You're not my supervisor.
I did say probably
😋
Shopify only dropped him because they didn't think he'd actually ship the swastika shirts, not because he was selling the swastika shirts.
I have some bad news for Yeezy. Nazis ~~weren't~~ aren't very fond of brown people either.
Forgive me if I have misunderstood something obvious, but wouldn't he be considered black?
Or the mentally ill...
Which is really ironic if you consider sociopathy to be a mental illness.
if you consider sociopathy to be a mental illness.
Nah, because that's just Antisocial Personality Disorder, which basically boils down to trusting your own judgement over society's.
That can be very bad, or very good.
Like, Harriet Tubman put her own values over society's laws, so she broke a shit ton of laws with zero remorse. Hard to say she had a mental illness. But her actions we celebrate today, met a lot of the diagnosing criteria.
It's just human variation, but it's likely incredibly undercounted because regardless of if the person is more on the "good" or "bad" side, they all think they have a better line of thinking than society. And fuck man. Take a look around.
Society as a whole isn't doing too hot lately, it's a pretty low bar to say you trust your own morals than society's.
Nah, because that’s just Antisocial Personality Disorder, which basically boils down to trusting your own judgement over society’s.
I am not here to attack people with Antisocial Personality Disorder, but it's definitely not just 'trusting your own judgement over society's', it also " is a personality disorder defined by a chronic pattern of behaviour that disregards the rights and well-being of others." The 'societal judgment' they're in conflict with is often the rights and well-being of others. I have an ex with it, and they had an extremely difficult time up until their early 40's, when they did improve a bit. We're still not sure if that's ASPD decreasing over time, or them getting used to dealing with it.
Again though, this isn't to attack people with it (who will suffer far more at the hands of others than themselves) but to hand-wave it as 'trusting your own judgment over society's' is... not accurate. From your own link:
People with antisocial personality disorder tend to purposely make others angry or upset and manipulate or treat others harshly or with cruel indifference.
Feeling no guilt about harming others.
Doing dangerous things with no regard for the safety of self or others.
I say all of this as someone who lived with someone else with ASPD. The one that caused our breakup was "Aggression toward people and animals." as they hurt me and attempted to hurt our cat in order to hurt me emotionally. This was a reaction caused by PTSD from their truly traumatic childhood, but I'd appreciate it not boiled down to some sort of Chaotic Good interpretation.
s a personality disorder defined by a chronic pattern of behaviour that disregards the rights and well-being of others
That is one of the diagnosis criteria...
But it's not a checklist where you gotta score 100%.
And to keep the Harriet Tubman example, legally under society's laws she wasn't freeing people. At the time and place she was at she was stealing property from people, relatively expensive property, and in large amounts.
Most people's experience with someone diagnosed with ASPD are because they have the real bad ones in addition to the others, and someone without them would also almost never go see a shrink of their own free will, because they still have the other parts where they think (maybe rightfully) that they know more than everyone else.
This also skews what the medical community sees.
If someone doesn't give a fuck about others, they still may realize the benefit of social nicities and benefits from being part of a community.
This ain't an idea I just had, people have been talking about this undercount since way before we stopped using outdated terms like "sociopath", and that was decades ago.
There are people who legit do not care about any other person than themselves. This isn't a question of legality, but morality.
The question you have to ask is "who do these actions benefit the most?"
Harriet Tubman absolutely cared about other people, otherwise she wouldn't have done what she did to help free slaves or advocate for women's sufferage.
How much did Robin Hood personally benefit from stealing from the rich and giving to the poor? If he was truely selfish, wouldn't he have kept all the riches to himself? Sure, he got fame and notoriety, but I think we all know that riches = power, and it has always been that way ever since large civilzations began.
Also a counterpoint: Following the law does not make you just if the laws you follow are unjust laws, especially if they hurt other people. The obvious example here would be Nazi Germany. Nazis were just following orders, and anyone who rightfully resisted their regime were severely punished. Were the people who resisted bad people? Were the people who followed the law good people?
Now, take someone like Trump. Has he ever done something in his life to benefit another person over himself? Has he ever made a sacrifice in service to another person? I'm not counting tit-for-tat corrupt dealings here, but genuine actions of kindness. What about Elon or Zuckerberg?
Yeah, I'm not sure exactly where he thinks he fits in Hitler's idea of the übermensch.
Unter it
Let's not forget the first time he got banned from Twitter when he put "the Jews" on "deathcon 5." This guy is broken. I hope he can get some help.
I reported yeezy.com for being in violation of GoDaddy's Terms Of Use.
Doubt it was me that caused any of this, but we can all do our part 😊
It says "This store is unavailable" which means it's probably not a DNS or webserver block and still uses the shop software to serve the page. So it's most likely a Shopify block.
Welp here's hoping he loses the domain next.
The only thing that amazed me about this is that he had a “talent agent”.
Yes, I too am shocked that one of the most successful musicians of the century had a “talent agent.”
The guy is a piece of shit but this is such an asinine comment. The only shocking part is he got dropped in the first place, considering he still somehow manages to make money hand over fist anytime he releases some half-finished album these days. The talent agencies will tolerate a hell of a lot as long as the money keeps flowing.
Dude has been out of it for years, and hasn’t put out anything of note during that time. He’s already made statements that should have alerted any reputable talent agency to stay the fuck away.
Nah, I'm surprised he has a talent agent, too, after his last outburst. I know talent agents aren't immune to bigotry but it's still a bit surprising that anyone would attach their name to his like that
Any note, no matter how sour, sounds like a song if you hold it long enough.
I’m not sure, but I think he’s been dropped and picked up by someone else before.
Talent agents choose money over ethics all the time. It’s practically their job. Regardless, things like this happen when the negative publicity makes a client a bad return on the agency’s investment (or a client hurts their reputation, which is to say, when a client hurts their chances of making money in the future). Their only concern is money, not antisemitism.
Next, he’ll be contacted by an even less prestigious agency whose desperation outweighs their ethical concerns. He may already have been.
I guarantee some PR-hack(s) reached out to him to offer a brilliant way they could spin this into a positive for his "brand."
Not only that, but they only signed him last year.
Every time I see shit like this, where it’s framed as “THIS HORRIBLE THING IS NOW HAPPENING TO THIS RICH PERSON AND THEYRE SUFFERING THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS” I’m always like
So what?
They’re still billionaires. They’re still incredibly rich. There’s nothing you can actually do to these people with shit like this. We’re far past the “we can just not support their company” or the “we can just not vote for them and ruin their life” stage of this, gang.
Yup. The time for alternative actions is now.
