If you haven’t seen them yet: Check out the “Lego Scandal” videos by Reckless Ben.

While some of his methods are certainly questionable, and he does misrepresent certain things to boost the production value, what he experiences seems to me to be indicative of the state of the entire U.S. system.

While all of this happens on a relatively small scale, his observations appear to me to be the rule rather than the exception in this country.

I know that, given all this, it may sound more frustrating than helpful, but don’t let it get you down, and don’t lose hope!

Throughout history, even in the face of massive and violent oppression, people have repeatedly broken free from the powerful - even through nonviolent resistance against horrific atrocities. India’s independence from British colonial rule is a good example.

Either way, all the best!

You’re right, of course, that the billionaires’ all-encompassing power—especially through digital media—makes public resistance very difficult, but I don’t think that such blatant corruption, as the U.S. regime practices it so shamelessly and, above all, so openly, would be tolerated in my home country (Germany). I mean, this is literally organized crime on a scale that’s almost beyond belief.

Corruption exists everywhere, but such blatant criminality in public office seems to me possible on this absurd scale only in the land of superlatives.

I can’t understand how this can be tolerated, especially since it has such negative consequences for the population.

The fact that U.S. authorities are actively covering up the crimes of what appear to be numerous and influential co-conspirators—by unlawfully redacting documents and withholding material they are required to release—is likely a factor. The fact that U.S. law enforcement agencies refuse to investigate this case for the same reason is another factor.

Consequently, there have been no new developments, since it is clear that the investigation has effectively been suspended, even though the case is obviously far from closed.

This in itself is, of course, a scandal that in any reasonably functioning country would inevitably lead to the government’s downfall.

But as many have already said, the media isn’t reporting on this because there is essentially no free press left in the U.S.

However, I simply cannot comprehend the fact that U.S. citizens have apparently resigned themselves to the fact that their system is so obviously corrupt that it not only fails to prevent the most serious crimes but actually enables them in the first place. To me, it is absolutely inexplicable that the current regime remains in office despite its obvious criminality and is not forced to resign through mass civil disobedience.

This regime and its network of oligarchs behind it are the reason why the most serious crimes, including those committed by Epstein’s accomplices, go unpunished.

In short: There is no longer any reporting on Epstein and his network because high-ranking members of the U.S. government are quite obviously involved themselves and are therefore doing everything in their power to suppress coverage. This, however, is only possible because U.S. citizens are not holding them accountable.

That’s frightening, but unfortunately it’s the reality.

Given recent events, all cloud-based LLMs should have been included here. In the history of humanity, there has never been a more profitable piracy operation.

What else is there to say? This statement is correct: religion has always been misused for political purposes - that’s what the sentence says, not that religion itself is always misused; that’s your interpretation.

Besides, if you’d read a little further, you probably would have figured out what I’m trying to say.

You’re reading into my statement that it somehow implies I’m making some kind of fundamental claim about religion here. I’m sorry, but it’s simply a fact that religion is being misused for political purposes. I can’t help it if you’re turning that into a fundamental claim that isn’t there at all.

What makes you think I’m not fully aware of that?

I’m talking about the dangers of exploiting religion, which remains one of humanity’s most serious problems, as is currently and undeniably illustrated by the monstrous regimes in the U.S. and Israel, for example.

I never said that religion should be rejected outright or that it cannot also do good.

I don’t understand how you came to that conclusion.

Religion certainly plays a regulatory role within society - historically, for a very, very long time. It also promotes values such as charity, empathy, and humility as virtues. The problem, unfortunately, is that this system of order is frequently abused in practice - just like the legal system, whose guidelines are often derived from religious values. So it is not religion itself that is the problem, but the way it is abused.

A good example of this is the ultra-conservative Christians in the U.S.: Since this ideology is being exploited politically to promote a ruthless form of hyper-capitalism that serves only a tiny elite, there is no room for values such as humanity and empathy, which the Bible clearly prescribes as positive values. Thus, inhuman policies are legitimized in the name of God and Jesus, though only those aspects of religion that enable the propagation of “in-groups” and “out-groups” are utilized. On the one hand, this serves to convey a sense of community, and on the other, to deny all rights -including the right to exist - to anyone who does not belong. Of course, this could no longer be reconciled with Christian ethics, but since this is not about ethics but about power, these schizophrenic movements are nevertheless very successful.

This logic is present in nearly all forms of religious extremism - from ultra-Christians to fanatical Muslims and Jews to Hindus and so on. These fundamentalist movements always have one thing in common: they are not interested in good, peaceful coexistence, but solely in the dominance of one group over another, which is because they are political movements whose leaders use religion merely as a means of power to legitimize their inhumane ideology.

But please don’t misunderstand what I’m saying here: It is not religion itself that is the problem, but the way it is abused to pit people against one another and distract them from who actually benefits from the corresponding policies.

This effect is by no means limited to religion: the same can be achieved, for example, by emphasizing nationality - in this case, concepts such as “foreign infiltration” serve as a backdrop of fear, so that the corresponding out-group can be denied basic rights, even their humanity.

Religion is, and always has been, a tool used by those in power to legitimize the status quo.

Its primary purpose is to shift responsibility for actions onto fate and thus divert attention from the fact that it is people who are responsible for these actions. In this way, even the most unfair and exploitative conditions can still be portrayed as just: the king by the grace of God, the kingdom of heaven that awaits the patient after death, hell that punishes the greedy, making it unnecessary to hold them accountable in this life, and so on.

This also works in reverse to strip people of the self-confidence that they can achieve things through their own efforts: Thank God for the food he has put on the table, for your success, and for everything else, because he has given it to you in his infinite generosity - don’t even think of making demands.

In this sense, religion provides a justification for hierarchies in society. It cements the status quo in the interests of the powerful.

Hence: People who do not question this narrative - which serves their own exploitation - but have made it the purpose of their lives are quite strange, because they are thereby harming themselves.

That reminds me of the scientists in Terry Pratchett’s Discworld, who let themselves dangle in a basket from the edge of the world to conduct their research.

Yes, that’s true, because of the network effect. But you can still rest on your laurels as long as there’s no serious competition. Another motivation for PeerTube & Co.

Regarding federated applications: I think they not only need content, but also have to become significantly more user-friendly to ever have a chance in the mainstream. It’s simply a reality that the average user doesn’t know the first thing about the applications they use—and, above all, that they never want to know. The essential and only “selling point” is and remains convenience—and even setting aside the lack of content, federated applications unfortunately can’t keep up. Not for technical reasons, but because the average internet user is such a complacent wimp.

Isn’t it unbelievable how multi-billion-dollar corporations push out updates that should never have been released, despite the warnings from their undoubtedly highly competent developers?

That alone says everything you need to know about the times we live in…

It seems we’ve reached the end of the road for hyper-capitalism.

I’ll remove the post.

But he only did that for his disciple Jeffrey …you have to cut him some slack…

/s

My point is that US citizens could remove their criminal president, but they don’t do so despite all his criminal machinations and despite the most serious war crimes.

Unfortunately, I don’t see it that way. I’ve found time and again that even US citizens in the Fediverse tend to display a massive amount of completely misplaced, naive national pride.

It seems to me that even those here, due to the oligarchy in the US that controls the media, are massively misinformed or uninformed despite their flirtation with free media.

Added to this is decades of propaganda that Americans apparently cannot overcome even here.

The best example is this post: Instead of the all-too-necessary self-criticism, there are only excuses - even though the U.S. president is a pedophile and a serious criminal. Nevertheless, U.S. citizens act as if that were not the reality.

Thank you very much. That’s basically what I’m getting at: there’s hardly any difference left between the US and Russia - both countries are controlled by oligarchs. But somehow, on the international stage, it’s portrayed as if only Russia were controlled by greedy autocrats.

However, since the mechanisms of control in the US are still far less pronounced than in Russia, I thought it would be a good idea to remind US citizens that they don’t yet live in a dictatorship, that they could still turn things around for the better if they would only give up their apathy and finally take action.

In Russia, it’s completely different. And in the US, it will soon be the same if citizens don’t fight back.

Why, it’s the truth. The US is ruled by a third-rate TV personality who could only become president because his father was a billionaire. That’s a fact.

The man was a megastar in the 90s… With a hit TV series that ran for six seasons during the heyday of the medium. He also starred in various Hollywood films. I really don’t know what else there is to relativize.

Edit: But hey, maybe you still have to sugarcoat it somehow because the US president is a third-rate television personality, just like most of his cabinet. These people are actually forgettable, but because they have rich parents, they are the government, rape children under state protection, and get away with it completely unpunished because the US population lets it slide.