u/CummingInTheNile

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Virginia/comments/1ss67kn/virginia_voters_approve_democrats_redistricting/

HIGHLIGHTS

Well I just got disenfranchise to protect democracy so there is that >skill issue >>So much for “fairness”. Guess we are in the age of elitism >>>We left the era of fair in 2000 when the supreme court stole the election. Get used to it. >>>>I thought making claims about elections was bad? >>>>>You’re telling on yourself >>>>>>Stop gaslighting please!!!! I have not made any claims about the election and I invite you to audit my profile to prove it. Please go ahead and feel free >>>>>>>That’s not gaslighting. You’re being dishonest

Imagine clapping and cheering for doing exactly what you hate them for doing. America is lost. >Please tell your Republicans reps to ban gerrymandering nationwide in the next election :) >>Acting like dems will vote for that lmaoooo >>>There were two bills for that very thing, put forth by Democrats. Guess who said no? >>>>Bro please. This is like the files. When Dems had the power to release them, they didn't. When Reps had the power, they didn't. They both know they'd go down together, but they can be performative and look good by acting like they'll do something. >>>>>That’s not even close to true. The files were literally under seal till near the end of December 2024. Who took office in January 2025? >>>>>>They could have opened them no problem. Executive order. Or are you gonna sit there and act like a seal should prevent the Epstein client list from being held accountable? It was a stupid justification then, and it is now. Stupid as the claim they were making that the files don't exist.

Finally. Time to enjoy some MAGA tears. >You are no better than them. By executing this power grab, you have laid down in the same mud and swallowed with the pigs you despise >>Exactly this. It's like watching people applaud the death of democracy because they're the tyrants now in charge. >>>It's temporary >>>>That's what they say now. There's always another "emergency" around the corner to make them extend it. Just like how everyone here complained when temporary COVID relief and ACA subsidies ended. >>>>>It’s literally written into the amendment that it’s temporary. >>>>>>I remember when the Patriot Act was supposed to expire in 2005. It was literally written into it. Two decades later... >>>>>>>I remember when the Epstein files were supposed to be fully released. 5 months later…

sic semper tyrannis >So you let a few people in Richmond enforce boundaries on millions to prevent tyranny? >>Actually idk if you noticed but we voted on it, bozo >>>Just because a Mob votes for tyranny does not change the definition of tyranny dude (note how you can reply with slang without being mean. It’s amazing) >>>>so can we both acknowledge, what Trump is advocating for in Texas and Florida and any state where he can benefit, is tyranny? With the added note that he also doesn't expect votes on the matter? >>>>>Gerrymandering is bad period. I am happy to acknowledge that >>>>>>Let us know when you want to accept the rest of reality

You mean disenfranchised the same way republicans have disenfranchised voters in this state for years? Remember, Dems wanted to get rid of gerrymandering and Republicans said no. It’s high time they take a bite of the shit sandwich they’ve been making the majority of us eat for years. >When have I ever voted to disenfranchise someone. Please tell me. I’m waiting >>Did you vote for representatives who voted against measures to end gerrymandering at the federal level? What about voting for representatives who eagerly yank snap benefits and Medicare/Medicaid from poor voters which makes it harder for them to participate electorally. Presumably you voted for Senators who would have happily voted along with their Republican colleagues in McConnel's naked and hypocritical power grabs in SCOTUS. Judges who have consistently voted to gut the civil rights act among other judgments disenfranchising your fellow citizens. Every election where you've voted for a Republican you have voted for a party that supports rapists, felons, and advocates against the rights of minority groups. Every election. >>>And everyone who voted for Spanberger falls under this don’t they? >>>>No. Because the Dems are still willing to end Gerrymandering. You'll notice this is a temporary measure. Any attempt to continue this would require a fresh vote after authorization in two successive legislative sessions. And the Dems have been fairly consistent about trying to propose equitable enfranchisement at the federal level. Ending gerrymandering. The national voter compact. Dems don't go out of their way to defund electoral places or the DMV in rural areas where they govern, in contrast to Republicans who aggressively disenfranchise and suppress urban voters. So no. Voting for a democratic candidate does not fall under this. >>>>>She signed a bill into law that will enact the literal definition of gerrymandering this year. You can’t claim to oppose gerrymandering and then participate in gerrymandering without being intellectually dishonest >>>>>>You can because the Dems are still willing to end gerrymandering with a clean federal solution. And you'll remember that it was the Dems who ran the anti gerrymandering campaign here in Virginia originally while the Republicans played their usual dirty games. But so long as a Republican Congress and a Republican SCOTUS keep defending gerrymandering while a rapist Republican president demands red states gerrymander it is reasonable for Democrats to retaliate. If you and your party are so against gerrymandering they could fix it tomorrow with federal legislation appointing nonpartisan districting commissions. But they won't will they? And you can keep pretending their (and your) bad faith is anything but. The original question you asked was simple. When have you voted for disenfranchising people. I showed you how. And like any good Republican you've instantly switched to bad faith goalpost switching.

I am moving OUT of this stupid fucking shit hole >You won't be missed >>Keep saying this as democrat states continue to lose EC votes. While republican states continue to gain them.

The Commonwealth of Virginia: kicking tyrants’ asses since 1776 >As if Virginia didn't just massively restrict 2A rights in the state (a common action of tyrants) >>2A prevent tyranny? Why are so many 2A supporters helping that tyranny by joining ICE? They have done much to usher it in. Most pro-2A people have shown they are perfectly fine with boots on necks. >>>Why haven't you gotten a gun and taken action? It's hypocritical to demand others take action for your cause. Most people's priority are to protecting thier family, not searching for federal agents to get into gun fights. "Why won't gun owners risk death/injury/conviction to fight for my ideals?"

After this I don't want to hear people in this sub conplain about gerrymandering in other states. Or bitch about "fascism" and "democracy at stake" after y'all voted for an authoritarian amendment to strip half of Virginians of their representation. >At least there was a vote. Texas' legislature just did it. Florida's legislature is going to just do it. Missouri did as well. California and Virginia at least put it up for a vote. >>I don't know why y'all keep making this claim like it's some kind of moral high ground or excuses the authoritarian tactic. They had to put it to a vote they had no choice, since they had to overturn constitutional amendments. >>>Wonder why that wasn’t true in Texas >>>>Or Florida. I swear it's like maga refuses to acknowledge their side did it let alone didn't even give the people a chance. Zero self awareness. >>>>>Democrats tried their best to not give us a chance here either back in 2020. 46 Democrats in the house of delegates voted against the bipartisan commission, while only 9 voted for it. Republicans in the house of delegates voted for it unanimously. >>>>>>Oh we’re doing this lie again? 14 of the 15 members of the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus were in that 46. Say explicitly that the Black Caucus was conspiring to protect gerrymandering. Do it. The amendment’s constitutional text contained zero Voting Rights Act or minority protections. That is why they voted no. You also left out 2019. That vote was 83-15 in the House and 40-0 in the Senate, with Democrats overwhelmingly in favor while they were in the minority. Republicans voted unanimously in 2020 because they were in the minority. Next, the amendment passed. 54-46 in the House, 38-2 in the Senate, 65-35 at the ballot box And Democrats were proven right about the structural defect they flagged. The amendment let any 5-member bloc deadlock the commission and routed it to the Virginia Supreme Court, which at the time was entirely Republican-appointed. The commission deadlocked exactly as predicted, the Republican-appointed court drew the 2021 maps, and Democrats have lived with those maps until now. A party trying to gerrymander does not hand map-drawing to the other party’s judges.

The TACO man just got a taste of FAFO from the Commonwealth To the gop voters in rural VA who voted for trump and opened up this can of worms: enjoy your new Congressional representation 🎉 >Man, its almost hard to believe why rural people hate urban voters. >>Reminder that Republicans from rural areas are why a national gerrymandering ban didn't pass in 2021. They wanted states to retain the ability to gerrymander for political purposes and that's what happened. >>>Reminder that all the most gerrymandered states are blue >>>>What a comically blatant lie. https://gerrymander.princeton.edu/

Not a particularly surprising result given a blue national environment, biased ballot language designed to misinform voters, and much more money on the D side. Definitely seems like it was a good decision for Dems to wait for a blue national environment to push through the gerrymander >I do not understand how it was misleading. I read the question today on the paper ballot and it was like, extremely common and straightforward language… >>Republicans tend to have lower literacy rates. >>>That just seems like massive cope from you. The amendment already passed, you don’t have to pretend like the ballot language isn’t intentionally misleading anymore >>>>"Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia's standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?" Can you point out the confusing part? >>>>>Virginia already has a fair map. Uninformed people may not know this, and read “restore fairness” to mean that fair districts are being implemented. Not that hard >>>>>>Hard for republicans who cannot read, I suppose, but people who can read know that it’s not referring to some unfairness emanating out of Virginia, because it does not say that. And people who pay attention know that Republicans gerrymandering in Texas unbalanced the national environment, which is…shockingly…unfair. Crazy, I know.

To all those celebrating this outcome; if the same lines were drawn but would lead to a majority red map over blue, would you still have voted the same way you did? "Divide and Choose." Edit: Seeing assumptions in replies that I'm a Republican. Keep guessing. And shoutouts to whichever of you immature dolts is concerned enough about me to report the post for suicide-baiting; grow the fuck up. >No, the whole point was to counteract Republican scheming in Texas. Hopefully the mid-decade redistricting is a wash for both sides, so neither tries this nonsense next time. The only way that happens is it the blue states retaliate. A better hypothetical would be: if California started this whole thing, and the Dems were trying to keep a majority they would otherwise lose, should Virginia equalize by drawing a red map? >>No, because letting the actions of other states dictate our local policy is foolish. >>>It’s not local policy, it’s federal representatives

Everyone upset needs to remember that least there was a vote. There was an opportunity for No to win. Same thing in California. Texas' legislature just did it. Florida's legislature is going to just do it. Missouri did as well. Democratic voters there didn't get a say. Republican voters in CA and VA did. >So I should be happy others voted to disenfranchise me? >>My advice? Might want to look at a new state. Cause you're never gonna get that vote back. They'll lie and say some crap about 2030. But they'll have an excuse then. >>>Don't like getting beaten? Don't start the fight. >>>>Didn't start it. But we'll see how y'all deal with Florida finishing it.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/BrandNewSentence/comments/1sqkhhb/im_almost_done_paying_off_my_tate_mcrae_ticket/

HIGHLIGHTS

I’ve got no sympathy for people whining about high concert ticket prices, it’s a luxury. Want to stick it to Ticketmaster? Don’t go. >Concerts are a luxury? Wtf? >>At that price? Yes. >>>I agree about that price. But I completely disagree that concerts, theatre, etc. are a luxury by definition. It's a normal way to spend time usefully. >>>>If you don't need something to survive, that's a luxury. >>>>>This is really strange and sad logic, tbh. >>>>>>Words mean things and luxuries by definition are not necessities. Facts are not "really strange and sad logic"

What a shit take. I hope everything you love that isn't a necessity gets monopolized utterly the same exact way live entertainment has, so that you get to watch the prices of the things you love rise beyond your means, so that you are left with nothing to look forward to in life except, work, sleep and your eventual death. >Are you ok? Know how you fight back against a monopoly? Dont buy their products. And we’re not exactly starved for entertainment. >>To quote Andy DuFresne: how can you be so obtuse? There's nothing stopping what happened to live music from also happening in other industries. Including necessities, I might add. Like, for example, medicine. >>>Nice reference, sometimes I can be acute guy. Fair point, but I would hope governments would intervene with necessities. >>>>Yeah you would hope but thats not exactly working out for insulin prices now is it? >>>>>Only in the US, where they get a lot of things wrong. >>>>>>We are talking about Ticketmaster, a US company, selling tickets in the US, for a US-based artist. Of course Im talking about insulin in the US Sherlock. >>>>>>>It exists in other countries, Watson.

Bootlicking weirdo >Bootlicking is when no concert ticket >>Bootlicking is white knighting for a monopoly for no reason. >>>They said it's your fault for using the services of the monopoly and to fight it you should boycott. How is that bootlicking? Lmao, you're weird. >>>>They said don’t complain at all. Why the fuck does Ticketmaster need you to defend them? Like sorry, Ticketmaster has ruined live event experiences in this country, but the problem is… the people complaining about them doing that? You’re literally here complaining about people complaining. >>>>>They didn't say that, they said to not buy the tickets

Baffling. The only way things improve is if people stop splurging ridiculous sums on concerts. Googled Tate.... actually assuming it was a guy. It isnt >Your grand idea is… just stop doing this? Genius! And I promise you not knowing one of the biggest pop stars on the planet isn’t the flex you think it is. >>I find it hard to believe he is one of the biggest pop stars on the planet. I have literally never heard of him. The biggest stars seep through to people who aren't paying attention. Taylor Swift and Bad Bunny for example. >>>You being old and out of touch doesn't somehow make her less famous. She has 45 million monthly listeners on Spotify >>>>And according to Spotify that makes her the 85th most popular artist. Which sure is high, but let's not pretend she's top 10 or something. >>>>>Are there only 10 famous pop singers now? >>>>>>She ain't gonna fuck you, dude >>>>>>>Sexualizing women isn't as tuff as it seems >>>>>>>>Lol you thought this would turn out differently, that’s funny Karen.

Jesus christ, and for Tate McRae??? >I truly have never heard of this person >>That’s not a flex lol >>>Nor have I and I’m 30 years old lol. I think it’s pointing to the absurdity that tickets cost that much for someone who isn’t even a household name. My wife paid $700 for Taylor Swift and I thought that was bad but at least everyone knows who TS is >>>>She was the 28th most streamed artists in the world in 2025 bro >>>>>I’m 24 and I’ve never heard of this person >>>>>>Still not a flex >>>>>>>Youre the only person here telling ppl its not a flex. Is it supposed to be?

This is giving strong Disney Adult energy. >This comment section giving strong "can't tell what a joke on the Internet is" energy. >>Go on her x profile, it seems very real or its just a very specific satire account. >>>I went at your recommendation. She seems like a human being with a sense of humor and this tweet is still a joke. >>>>Disagree

As a sane person WTAF >I literally have no idea who tate mcrae even is. >>A Zionist Industry plant

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/1sosn90/hot_take_the_artemis_accords_are_bad_china_is/?sort=controversial

HIGHLIGHTS

Very naive of anyone to ever think we weren't going to start claiming land in space as soon as we started funding actual space colinization. >(OP) So your counterarguemnt is to call me naive for wanting better? You will look at a bully & go ”they were naive to think they wouldn’t get bullied” blaming the victim rather than the bully who did the bullying. Fuck the US >>So let's say people start living on the moon. They spend billions of dollars setting up a permanent site, sending it all up the and living there. Then a hostile nation goes up and builds a dome around it so no one can get in or out. By you that would be legal right, since no one owns the land they are free to do that. The sad reality is not having any ownership just won't work in the real world where bad actors exist. >>>I believe in both public land, and private land ownership. I think they're are better ways we could do the system, but anyone who thinks all land should be public and free is just not willing to admit the world won't work that way at all. At least now and in the near future >>>>Public land only exists under the guarantee of some power structure. If that power is too weak, or too far away to exert itself, people will claim that land.

This sub is increasingly getting overwhelmed by American jingoists and exceptionalists, now we have people saying “who cares about treaties lol!”. And here we have nerds unironically defending the enclosure of space commons in a way that specifically benefits a single nation. wtf happened to this sub man, it’s such a bummer >This sub is increasingly getting overwhelmed my Chinese propagandists and bots, now we have people saying “who cares about treaties (if it's China breaking them) lol!”. And here we have nerds unironically defending the enclosure of space commons in a way that specifically benefits a single nation. wtf happened to this sub man, it’s such a bummer >>The difference between what I said and what you said is that what I said is actually true, and you're just being juvenile for lack of a substantive response. >>>"One of us only speaks the truth, the other only lies. To advance to the next room you must solve our riddle" >>>>Or more accurately, I made an obvious observation and you lazily turned it around because, again, you have no response. >>>>>Or more accurately, I made fun of you for saying something ridiculous and you lazily clamed it was wrong without proof because you have no response. >>>>>>It's not ridiculous; in this thread alone multiple people cast aspersions on international treaties, multiple people supported enclosure of space resources, a guy supported the militarization of space, the top comment supports might-makes-right seizure of resources, and there's multiple people apologizing for American foreign policy. All these things are anathema to the open and peaceful exploration of space, and are emblematic of the continuous serious degradation of the sub. Here's the part where you lazily swap words and think you're doing anything but shielding your ego under the guise of trolling.

That's just because China can't dump a bunch of sand on the Moon and create a new island chain to build military bases on. When they figure that out, they'll be all over it. >The United States has 800 overseas bases. China has 1 >>so you're comparing the USA having bases in other countries through mutual agreements.. to China bumping their territorial waters, contested by many neighboring countries, by creating artificial islands? Interesting take >>>Okinawa, Diego Garcia and Guantanamo Bay aren't accessed be mutual agreement. >>>>Okinawa and Diego Garcia are both there due to a mutual agreement. Guantanamo is there due to a treaty signed in 1903 and reaffirmed in 1934. >>>>>Yeah you might want to update yourself on the current situation >>>>>>That is the current situation, unless you’d like to enlighten me with a link?

China built illegal islands in the south China Sea. >China doing something wrong doesn't make space colonialism okay, which is the point of this post. >>Please genuinely never use terms you don't understand ever again. 🙏 >>>Merriam-Webster dictionary defines colonialism as “domination of a people or AREA by a foreign state or nation.” >>>>Colonialism specifically refers to the dominantion of foreign people and their lands. There is nobody on the moon, it's nobody's land. >>>>>The entire point of the Outer Space Treaty which the US is flagrantly refuting with the Artemis Accords is that the moon belongs to all of us. It's everybody's land, and I will not respect the "right" of some corporate nonce to pay someone to plant a flag on it and say it's his now. >>>>>>No you're not getting it. The moon isn't being claimed, only the direct area around American landing sites or construction sites is under temporary "jurisdiction" of the US. The Chinese wouldn't do it any other way. >>>>>>>They have. They are. The moon is mine and every other person's. It's nor for sale. >>>>>>>>Yeah it's not being bought. It belongs to whoever can get there in the first place, so not you.

China stole Tibet and is brutally oppressing them, along with Xinjiang. >When you look back in time you can see that nearly every country has a similar history there. America too, Australia too. Indict wanna play it down but we should finally learn to live together and handle the bigger issues on our planet. >>" When you look back in time you can see that nearly every country has a similar history there." They're doing current harm. "we should finally learn to live together and handle the bigger issues on our planet." In China's case, that would include stopping the abuse of people that don't want to be occupied anymore, or simply disagree with their policies. >>>Native American independence when? Palestinian independence when? Why stop st Tibet? >>>>You're right :3 WHY stop at tibet? All peoples should be free, including the Tibetans, the Palestinians, Native Americans etc. anyway, this is r/space not r/worldpolitics so maybe lets relax a bit yeah

Counter hot take: China is against it because they didn't get to implement it first. Let's not forget that China is making claims on lands that it doesn't own and, despite international arbitration favouring against China's movements, China continues its colonization efforts to the detriment of its neighbours. The US is no saint, but China is arguably worse. >"The US is no saint, but China is arguably worse." Go outside pls. Is China bombing/helping bomb people from the third world? >>Should we talk about the Uyghurs? >>>[deleted] >>>>Thriving in Xinjiang? Are you a CCP bot? https://www.xinjiangpolicefiles.org/

If China got there first, they’d claim it as their own. >The amount of "America bad, china good" posts I've been seeing lately is crazy. Look at r/futurology for Christ sake. >>[deleted] >>>If they were wealthy - as you point out - surely you can understand why they might not like socialism, and would prefer a highly unequal country such as the USA. >>>>China is not a socialist country in any way, shape or form. It's an authoritarian single-party state with a capitalist and highly unequal economy, dressed up with communist imagery. Many capitalist countries have better social safety nets and especially more worker empowerment. >>>>>They may not have much of a social safety net but they do have a ton of suicide nets, surely that counts for something

i don't know anything about the Artemis accords, but i will say this. the UN has no real authority unless the members are willing to act upon it's decisions, see Israel/Palestine. the only real reason that the US/China/Russia haven't put weapons in space is because they know that if they do the other nations will as well and it'll be a problem. also i don't know what you're on about in the last paragraph. it seems like you're implying that China follows border laws and the US doesn't. make no mistake, every single "freedom of navigation" trips that the US makes in Asia are 100% legal and it's China that freaks out. >The reason we don't have weapons in space is beacuse it's utterly impractical. See Reagan's project Star Wars Putting titanium rods into LEO means the weapon would fly over your target once every 2 hours, as opposed to an ICBM flying across the globe in about 30 minutes And you'd have to figure out an orbit that flies over Moscow, Beijing and Teheran in one loop. If you wanted Rods From God, you'd need about as many launchers as Starlink has satellites. And you can't really bulk launch tens those things in one rocket when your projectiles are made of the densest stable isotopes on earth. And putting a warhead to geostationary orbit over the enemy capital would mean a distance at minimum double that of a ground launch. And all of it exteremely visible, thus a lot easier to intercept. Also the rocket required to carry another rocket would be huge. As for lasers, the first issue is clouds. >>And all of your objections disappear like a mirage the moment that you can start building things in space from resources that also come from space. I suspect you are going to break out in the Luddite hymn "It will never work." Most do when confronted with their status quo bias. But we'll see. >>>I mean, not really. Orbits are still orbits, the time problem doesn’t go away, and increasing the number of objects to compensate for it will just make the other objections more true (e.g., shooting them down). >>>>SpaceX alone already has over 10,000 satellites up. Starshield has around 200 (although that is only a rough guess. Could be much higher). These are not yet full blown American national projects. They are more like a proof of concept, and the proof has worked.................. >>>>>No one is saying there won’t be weapons in space. There honestly probably already are. But you’re ignoring some pretty obvious issues that aren’t just “Luddite prayers,” they’re hard problems that aren’t currently practical to solve, and they won’t be for the foreseeable future. For example orbital mechanics being what they are and the potential for the Kessler Problem/effect. These aren’t problems that are a function of more imagination; they’re practical realities of our current level of understanding. It doesn’t mean they will never be, but it does mean there will need to be a significant increase in necessity or incentive, neither of which is present today. It might be tomorrow, but that isn’t likely because it hasn’t been for the last ~50 years..............

It’s clear that OP and most commenters here have not actually read the Accords, nor realize there are 60+ signatories. The core elements of the Accords are transparency and adherence to the OST. They are publicly available to anyone who spends five seconds googling. >Do you actually think that the US devised the AA, conducted dozens of bilateral discussions and spent this much time coordinating agreements and signing events just to reinforce existing law? >>have you fucking read them? they are literally just a bunch of promises to adhere to the outer space treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_Accords#Accords >>>I’ve read every single word. The outer space treaty doesn’t say anything about mineral rights. Or keep out zones. Or heritage sites. The whole point of the AA is to re-interpret the OST in favorable terms without requiring UN consensus.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/whoathatsinteresting/comments/1snzq16/japanese_restaurantnot_all_japanese_people_are/

HIGHLIGHTS

I would still ask for the menu >Why??????? And would you even know the Japanese to do so? Or be able to respond to a single follow up question/statement? Or would you just bark English at them and prove their point? (as racist as it is) There's like a billion restaurants every block in Japan, why would you specifically try to force yourself onto the one place you're not wanted? I've seen other people say similar stuff when people post images like this, it's bizarre. You don't speak the language required to dine there, and they are openly racist on top of it. Why force yourself in? Edit: it would be funny if you spoke Japanese though >>Probably because it’s funny to fuck with xenophobes. >>>You aren't "fucking with them", you are proving to them that they are justified in their racism. You are showing them that you're exactly as stubborn and entitled as they thought you were. >>>>Dude, that’s actually nutty. “Proving they’re justified in their racism??” Get fucking real. >>>>>This is a language barrier issue with racism on top. Language barrier is a serious issue in Japan, not everyone is equipped to handle it. If you went in there with perfect Japanese yeah you could fuck with them. But if you just bark English at them you're going to accomplish nothing >>>>>>Okay. But this guy says he hates "foreigners". I very much doubt it is a language barrier only problem. And you just basically said that "all" foreigners are stubborn and entitled, which includes only like 8 billion people.

It's actually crazy how many people in the comments are defending this. Imagine if a sign said "No dark skins allowed! Not everyone gets hospitality" over the Confederate Flag or some other hostile iconography from other countries. Would you say "just move along" or "I like it because of the honesty, good for them >The Japanese didn’t enslave black people and don’t rehash inflammatory symbols like the confederate flag >>Japan has a right to maintain its identity and not get washed out with multiculturalism >>>Doesn't every ethnicity then by that measure? >>>>No, not when you kidnap people and force them to live in your country. You can't then tell them they're not allowed to participate. >>>>>I've got some bad news about Japan for you then. >>>>>>Okay, and I would be against those people being excluded from this restaurant.

It’s their country and restaurants, they can do what they want. >Put a sign on my restaurant saying “whites only” and see what happens >>Well they said Japanese, not a skin color. The correct way to word your comment would be sign saying "Americans only". And yes, they have a ton few* of those restaurants in the States. Edit: I agree ton was an overstatement. I've definitely seen at least 3, and assumed there were more. Im just frustrated with racism. >>>Would a black Japanese really be welcomed at a place like this? >>>>Yes the sign is in English they just don’t wanna deal with cultural differences and entitled western tourists, it’s not even race related the way Americans sometimes are. >>>>>lol my restaurant is only for American citizens because I don’t wanna deal with cultural differences and entitled tourists

I strangely respect it >you really shouldnt, they are simply racist >>I respect it because of that. They're giving the white race a taste of its own medicine. >>>Did you know that not all foreigners are white? And not all white people are evil? >>>>Most white people are racist. Some just hide it better than the others.

Uh yeah other countries are like this and honestly it's probably worse depending on where you are. The US is actually extremely welcoming for most people and cultures and those who say no, probably don't ever go outside >You uh missed the last year of ICE? >>The fact that its universally hated across the U.S kinda proves his point >>>my man ya'll voted for this >>>>Until every citizen is required to vote no exceptions it would be ignorant to say "y'all voted for this" >>>>>You're asking for a level of thoughtful discretion that is rare on Reddit.

It's their country, they can do as they wish. There is a reason their people still look Japanese and their culture remains largely intact. It's kind of fucked up to be racist but it's their choice. >Double standard though. Imagine if an American did the same thing. Or a Brit, etc >>It wouldn't bother me, I'm American, and a mixed race person. In my view it is their choice. I support property rights. I don't support forced inclusion. >>>You say this but go back 40 years and banks didnt loan to black people, white only neigherbourhoods were a thing, and refusing to serve asians in restaurants was both normal and allowed. By your argument the government stepping in back then was bad as it was a personal choice most business held. Some restaurants weren't racist themseves, but didnt want to risk the loss of business by hosting foreigners. >>>>I believe in a free society. As long as the people aren't being violent with each other then it is what it is. You forget, on the other side of that stick, there were places a white person would have been beaten to death if they ventured into as well. Every race has bad people. You cant regulate or force that away. You can kind of force people to smile to your face, but it doesn't change what they think about you. I rather know someone is racist so I can just avoid their place altogether instead of having them be forced to serve me. >>>>>Your ignorance of history, or at least active support for racism in our communities is astounding. >>>>>>I don't really give a fuck either way. If someone wants to be racist that's on them. As long as they leave me alone then it is what it is. I will just take my business on down to the store that is not racist to me or is racist to someone else. I don't like a sugar coated society, I rather know where everyone stands.

This is not xenophobia. Some tourist are just rude and has no respect. >reddit demands that these Japanese natives be doormats for arrogant and rude tourists / foreigners. I wouldn't want my restaurant, rich in culture, to be diminished by some dork recording a loud and obnoxious video for Snapchat. "I'll just spend my money elsewhere" Go fucking do that then. They've thrived without your help. Not every avenue needs to be a mixing pot. I wouldn't want my small town overrun with streamers and loud foreigners, but these redditors feel entitled to every corner on earth like they're a child demanding to be played with on a playground, impeding on the spaces of others minding their own business. >>Hold that same attitude when a white business owner doesn't want foreigners on their premises (or be normal and don't) >>>No one is entitled to my patronage. If someone doesn't want me there, why would I try to force myself upon them? Why would I want to linger? That mentality is fucking stupid. >>>>Yes because the business owner is the victim and not the person being denied for their skin colour. >>>>>Holy low IQ. This has nothing to do with skin color lmao You can scream and complain until you're blue in the face I don't give a fuck. This business owner has done nothing wrong and I support them. They don't owe anyone they cooperation. I wouldn't serve a bunch of whiny tourists like you either.

This is always completely valid and acceptable for literally any race or culture (as long as it's not a white). >[removed] >>Culture is the shared set of beliefs, values, behaviors, traditions, language, and material objects that define a social group. The entirety of Western society is white culture. Imagine being such a brainwashed slime that you genuinely believe one singular demographic of people has no culture. Fuck off. Downvote this if the objective definition of culture conflicts with your anti-white worldview. >>>What culture does the other 50% of white people have if it's not white culture? >>>>100% of whites share white culture.. ? >>>>>You said Western society is white culture 50% of white people are not in the west. What culture do these people have if they, by your definition, doesn't have white culture >>>>>>Western society is a product of white culture. Japan is a product of Japanese culture, even despite some Japanese people not living anywhere near Japan. A black man born in Uganda is a part of black culture as well as being a part of Ugandan culture. Ugandan culture is a product of African culture. African culture is a subset of Black culture. Reread the definition of culture a few more times until it clicks. Shared experiences. White culture is what it is to exist as a white person in the same way that Black culture is what it is to exist as a Black person. It doesn't matter where you are. Every black person in the world share some experiences with each other. Ie, their hair and hygiene care, the foods they enjoy, the way society treats them by default. If you drop a random black man into the middle of a small asian village, it is irrelevant where that black man is from. He will be treated the same regardless. Every white knows how it feels to be burned by the sun. Every white knows how it feels to be held accountable for all of the flaws of our ancestors - even the ones we aren't related to. Every white knows how it feels to die from eating something too spicy. "Whites don't have culture" Where are all black people bowling and playing mini-golf? Where are all the asian Nickelback fans? If sushi is distinctly asian because an asians created the food, and collard greens are distinctly black because blacks created the food, explain to me how casseroles aren't distinctly white, given that whites created them? How about chocolate chip cookies? You are attempting to disprove the existence of white culture by holding white culture to a standard you hold no other culture to.

[Aahh I wish we could do this Prague🥲(https://www.reddit.com/r/whoathatsinteresting/comments/1snzq16/japanese_restaurantnot_all_japanese_people_are/ogpg0xn/) >I'm going to Prague in a few days. Should I be scared? >>Scared of what? Of falling into tourist scams like the chimney cakes? If you are respectful, quiet, polite and learn a few Czech words, you are very welcome. We are tired of piss drunk stag/hen night groups puking in every corner, big groups of tourists taking up the whole tram car because they didn't want to spend money on a tour bus and loud Americans with their stupid love locks and tipping culture. >>>"tipping culture" Help! Someone's giving me free money to show their appreciation for a job I did for them! Please make it stop! >>>>In many other places, this practice is seen as condescending, bordering on insulting. In addition, it lets businesses underpay their employees when they can rely on a culture of tipping. Let's not pretend tipping is a good practice. When did "I appreciate your service" stop being good enough to show appreciation? Oh yeah -- when businesses figured out they can pay waiters starvation wages because tipping will make up for it. >>>>>"In many other places, this practice is seen as condescending, bordering on insulting" Yeah, that's fucking stupid. "In addition, it lets businesses underpay their employees when they can rely on a culture of tipping." That's obviously not happening in countries without a tipping culture. >>>>>>"Yeah, that's fucking stupid." Americans when other cultures:

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/1ser7z7/so_i_said_this_to_my_flat_earth_dad/

Context: R/flatearth is a satire sub for people making fun of actual flat earthers

HIGHLIGHTS

It’s good you admire peoples efforts but NASA is not the place you want to give such admiration for. They are a occult organization with spicific hidden agendas brother. Same as many government institutions. >If your God is so weak it can be defeated by supposed vague occultism at some government department then it is not worthy of our recognition, never mind our worship. >>Not sure where I mentioned God. But also Many flat earthers are aware of their occultism and lies. Many people don’t believe in the moon landing, nor believe in NASA narratives or trust the government. And the numbers of people who distrust these institutions are increasing my friend. >>>You have to rethink your NASA narrative. So American of you. There are many other scientific organizations outside of the US. Reality doesn't care about your belief or trust when it is so easy for anyone that is educated and honest to observe reality. >>>>Same with all of them. NASA is popular here that is why I mention it my friend. >>>>>So, basically, all the smart people all over the world are in on a conspiracy to fool all the stupid people into believing a certain shape of the earth for, reasons? But you rag-tag group of dumbfucks has seen the truth! Got it 👍 >>>>>>If i wanted to lie to a mass number of the human population do you think i would use naive tactics that lack substance or logic or would I fund scientific institutions and promote a social and cultural structure that idealizes scientific insitutions and treats them as absolute authorities of truth and then use those same structures to lie using the most convincing and testable arguments? I would pick the later, and I’m certain if your were evil you would have likely used the same approach towards lying to people >>>>>>>If it were all a hoax, it should be easy to disprove it all...so where is your EVIDENCE that it is a hoax?

How is that proof lol. You believe the government over your own father because the government is your daddy now. >Who's your daddy? >>Jesus is my daddy. 😶‍🌫️ >>>Wow, so you believe a book that was constructed over hundred of years using population control tactics thru religious indoctrination?... do you not see how it sounds turned right back at you?

I wonder if there are any real flat earthers in here? I joined after my wife s friend turned out to be one. Back then I fixed it with forcing her to call a friend on a different continent and point the camera towards the moon, while we were outside. She stopped then. How can people be this dumb? Today it's not that hard to disprove. >I hate to break it to you. Once you go flat, you don't go back. Your wife's friend just doesn't wanna hear you bitch >>“Once you reject math and science, you’re beyond being reasoned with” is a weird thing to admit >>>obsessing over science and math is a pretty dorky thing to admit >>>>Believing the earth is flat is an extremely moronic thing to admit

One of my favorite pictures from the mission so far! To discredit the hard work of so many people for years and years of work is not only insulting to the brave men and women who were a part of these projects, but it's also insulting every human accomplishment ever achieved. >I gave this perspective for an all powerful creator and evolutionists hate it of course 😮‍💨 >>Tell your god he did a great job on children's cancer. Real achievement right there. Standing on the shoulders of giants. >>>Thats the devils creation right there mate. And our choice. >>>>Hmmmmm, no. Jehova (demiurge) created the physical world and that which is in it according to your own scripture. This would include Children’s cancer. Lucifer -who you refer to as The Devil but known as (the light bringer) gave knowledge to humans (thereby allowing the pursuit of that knowledge and learning how to cure the cancer that your tyrannical creator inflicted on the world). Again this is all just your own scripture. It’s not open for interpretation it’s literally how genesis portrays creationism. >>>>>God created a perfect world. Its in Genesis. When was the last time you read a bible?

What about Buzz A. Saying he and his fellow astronauts never went? Or how ironically the last moon missions just so happened to come right after a world war to get the public’s attention shifted; sorta like this one starting right before the next world war. Not to mention the weird occult and seggs magik rituals the founding fathers of nasa participated in, or maybe it was the other 4 letter group of individuals whom the us rescued from Germany and Argentina and told them to change the last two letters of their groups name and they can come over here and do their thang. They were called Nasa when they got here, but they were na zoooo friendly before. But hey, let’s all believe nasa and big brother, cause they’ve neverrrrrr lied for the detriment of society. >This is called a Gish Gallop, where somebody makes a bunch of rapid-fire bad claims that take longer to debunk than they do to make. A good argument isn't constructed, just a big pile of crap somebody else has to pick up. There's plenty for other people to pick apart here, but the one I find especially fun is the one on the timing of the current missions. The launch date was set months ago. The current war was very obviously not planned that far back. >>You think this war happened on a whim and wasn’t coordinated months if not years in advance? Hmmmm Idunno Maybe like 4+ years in the making since there was a whole arse different administration in office, so they had to wait until they were back in office to keep the plan going? I’m not betting all my eggs on the coincidental timing of it. HOWEVER, it is just a lil odd the last time moon missions were headlines, so were the world wars. It’s not even conspiracy at this point people. >>>This war was so non-planned that they keep talking about trying to pull out and apparently didn't even anticipate the Hormuz Strait being closed. This is not what a war that's been planned for years looks like. "HOWEVER, it is just a lil odd the last time moon missions were headlines, so were the world wars." WWI- 1914-1918, WWII- 1939 (or significantly earlier if you count Japan invading China as the start)-1945, Apollo moon landings- 1969-1972??? >>>>Please tell me when WW2 ended, and when the Cold War and space race started. I’ll make it even simpler for you. Mr. Chronological. Please list it with the years like you did for the rest of us if you’re so kind.

I work with this really really nice autistic kid. I mean he is to the point that you had almost think there was something beyond autism like some sort of alien thought patterns, and we were at the hot bar getting lunch Sunday and talking about the space mission and a guy in line behind us is like the Earth is flat. They’re not going to the moon that’s all the sound stage and my coworker looked at him and goes. I may be messed up in the head, but at least I’m smart enough to know it’s real and when the guy tried to respond he goes I don’t wanna hear you make sounds anymore. >"I don't want to hear you make sounds anymore." is now my favorite response ever! >>It’s great because you are telling them to stop talking but their words are so meaningless that it’s just sounds at that point. >>>Are you an ai agent? I pilfered through your account and i cannot find anything that makes me think you are a real human. You use ai images on your posts and — and, your posts and comments seem like they are “in character” for a person who only exhibits one personality trait. Wtf? “i’m 43 and all i want to do is drink alcohol and screw bimbos on a yacht! Yeah! Everything is a consumable for me and people are things. Woo!” Can other humans correct me if i am reading this wrong? >>>>Those are the words of a sociopath >>>>>You should keep scrolling their “content”. >>>>>>Seems like they’re playing a character. Love for landchads is a satirical subreddit

My wife is a flat earther and it’s crazy that her answer to every shred of prof is “it’s fake”. I’ve learned to just stop arguing about it because it’s not worth it. >Genuinely cannot imagine being married to someone like that. How can you be attracted to someone who is either that deep in denial or that dumb? No offense intended but also if you're offended I'm fine with that. >>Well honestly I doubt there is any couple out there that 100% agree about everything. If so, the marriage would be boring. Sure, it blows my mind that she could seriously think that earth is flat, but I don’t think it’s something that a marriage should end over. >>>I think there's a difference between disagreement and not living in the same reality. I want to say 'but to each their own' but this is a case I don't really believe it. >>>>Well it doesn’t affect any other part of our married life so, again, it’s not something I view as a reason to divorce. If anybody would leave a spouse over it, then I would say you never really loved them to begin with. As strongly as I feel about the fact of the earth being round and humans ability to go into space, I just don’t view her unbelief of it as a dealbreaker. >>>>>My concern would be that anyone that believes the earth was flat despite mountains of evidence to the contrary could, probably does or at least will have serious issues dealing with some other objective reality at some other point in their lives.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1seo978/sam_altmans_sister_accusing_him_of_rampant_sexual/

HIGHLIGHTS

Unsubstantiated claims from a mentally ill person with no proof whatsoever after being caught lying several times before. What does Reddit do? Take it as absolute truth! It's been far too long since we had a good opportunity to be outraged. It's obvious why this gets deleted all the time. >Not arguing, but wondering: being caught lying several times before? What were those lies? >>Im not entirely sure what the lies are, but she is/was a sex worker who was cut from the family will. I'm not going to level any accusations against her, the above is factual. You can go to her X at phuckfilosophy and make your own determinations about her claims if youre curious. Edit: Downvoted by the reddit hate police. Cool. >>>That doesn't make her any less credible. Arron Schwartz also warned his friends about Altman saying he's "a psychopath, who would do anything". >>>>Being a mentally ill sexworker doesn't make one less credible? I admire your naivety >>>>>I’ll bite. Being mentally ill can be a mark against your credibility for sure. I’d love to hear how being a sex worker is a mark against your credibility. It’s funny you chose the term sex worker but still hold it as a mark against her. >>>>>>Choosing to become one is definitely correlated with certain things not being okay in your life. I'm not saying it destroys your credibility completely, but it probably lowers it a bit, compared to the average person.

Oh yeah? Who published this? Reuters? Holy shit. >Idk the man is gay and the family says she has mental health challenges. Could still be that she's telling the truth. Just take that information into account. >>This. Exactly. The gay thing is a red herring. In every culture throughout history, boys in puberty are often perpetrators and/or victims of CSA. They pick the easiest and weakest victims they can find, often a younger relative. It’s not about choice or sexual orientation at that point. It’s about the accessibility of a victim. >>>SA and rpe is about control. They dont have to be attracted to the individual to get off on the nonconsensual power exchange. >>>>I just don't buy that. You don't see straight men rping other straight men just for the power of it all. Is there some crime I'm missing? >>>>>Unfortunately, this is indeed a thing that happens. Read accounts of people from war torn countries, r*pe happens to both men and women. A fictional story that addresses the complexities of this issue is the Kite Runner. Additionally, consider that shame drives many men to stay quiet about being a victim. >>>>>>There are a trillion other ways to exert power over someone. Sex is literally about sex. I don’t understand where this misconception that sex is about power comes from.

"The Altman family has said Annie Altman has mental ​health challenges." I mean, who wouldn't after that. >Your comment is worded in a way that presumes the allegations are true, so exactly what leads you believe this? >>Because he’s a billionaire and anyone who is able to exploit others enough to make a billion dollars while so many people are suffering, anyone who is contributing to the downfall of society the way Altman has, is likely capable of sexual abuse. Rich powerful men aren’t called the Epstein class for no reason. If I have a side to pick here, I will believe the accuser and if the allegations aren’t proven then I will change my mind based off the evidence >>>That's fucking embarrassing dude. Having one more dollar than $999,999,999 doesn't automatically make someone guilty of whatever you want them to be. >>>>I like how you woke up and said “I’m gonna go out into the world and blindly defend the people who least need and deserve it.” My boy got an A+++ in Bootlicking 101 >>>>>no, they're preserving a basic logical, epistemic standard. it's crazy how people don't realize how easily this exact behavior is used against disliked minority groups. The "they deserve it because all <x> people are like this deep down" literally the exact same language zionists use towards Gazans. that KKK used towards black people, and so on. And you try to defend your stance by invoking the "anyone who doesn't allow me to attack X group with impunity must be a sycophant" bullshit.

I know right. Classic abuser response to discredit victims. >Her mother said that. >>Mothers, parents, family members often discredit victims in their own family. >>>You get downvoted but it’s true, I’ve seen this happen in my local town and it’s so sickening that a lot of people don’t want to accept it, hear about it or get angry and attack the messenger. This shit happens >>>>Exactly it's fucking disgusting and extremely common and just so normalised and excused. I can't believe it. I hate it. >>>>>No evidence he did it >>>>>>The evidences is his sister's testimony. Which you conveniently ignore

Can somebody show me where the actual evidence of the claim is here, or is this just more "It happened, trust me bro" vibes? >This is not a hearsay situation. The actual victim is sharing their first hand account. Sounds to me to be very believable and do not see any reason someone would make this up. >>So it's somebody making a claim, and there is 0 evidence to back it up? Got it. Thanks for clearing that up. >>>Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. >>>>Absence of evidence isn't evidence either. Weird take.

Guilty until proven innocent again, eh Reddit? >To the courts that's true. But social and public perception doesn't work like that. We could watch a video of someone committing a crime, they would be innocent to the courts and deserve due process - but we could all look at what's in front of us and make our own conclusions. That's no different here, we can make a personal judgement on a situation that has no legal ramifications. All of that said, most people don't have a sister accusing them of rpe. I'm not waiting for a court to come to a conclusion about anyone who does. It's deeply alarming and it's odd that you need to jump in to (incorrectly) defend him. >>Not enough evidence for criminal authorities to pursue it, to date. Anyone can make any allegations in a civil lawsuit. It’s easy to say “standards are for courts,” but don’t pretend you have any special knowledge about this case or insight into the situation outside of a few sentences you read on Reuters from a Reddit link. >>>I have a right to an opinion it's not more complicated than that. >>>>Of course you have a right to your opinion. But your opinion impacts the fundamental reputation of someone regarding sexual abuse, obviously a matter of great importance. If someone accuses you of the same, don’t expect any mercy from the pitchfork crowd you’re a part of. If you’re willing to treat accusations as proof when you dislike the defendant, don’t expect that rule to spare you when roles reverse. >>>>>I haven't even said what my opinion is. None the less if my sister ever accused me of rpe I would absolutely not expect public opinion of me to remain the same. Regardless of my innocence. I'm not commenting on what a perfect world ought to look like - what a useless experiment. I'm just explaining what is. >>>>>>And if we accept that reputations should shift simply because accusations occur, then innocence becomes irrelevant to public judgment. That’s a dangerous and offensive standard to normalize

stuff this serious needs facts, not reddit court and emotional slop >The judges won't base their decision on reddit threads. Your misuse of the word slop reveals you as an ai fanboy. Sorry it's hard to see someone you admire accused of crimes. >>calling me fanboy is easy, facts still didnt magically appear lol >>>And they might not. The uncomfortable reality is that there are a lot of crimes committed which have little/no concrete evidence. It's s tricky situation. I was abused by my older sibling and would have no evidence to point to. >>>>sorry for what you went through, but personal story aint evidence in this case ;p >>>>>We're not talking about just this case nor just my anecdote, my recommendation to you was to read what people who work in the field say. My anecdote was only one half of my comment, I notice you didn't address the other half. >>>>>>Let the court decide. I can also say you touched me in the past. It reminds me of when Michael Jackson was impeached, so I'm not a fan of Altman. I simply distance myself from everything.

Makes sense why he is a part of the club now. >I know right??? Being a billionaire = sex predator seems to be a requirement these days. Disgusting. >>That's how this system works. That's why we see echoes of it in all levels. "This person got a promotion because of who they know, not what they know" "Why are positions of power constantly filled with abusers?" And so on. We intentionally reward people of this caliber by elevating them. >>>So all men who get promoted are abusive rpists. Cool. >>>>pretty much >>>>>How classy of you >>>>>>How classless of you. Have you not been around to see just how many powerful men are abusive rpists?

That would be weird regardless like why would you want to put your family in the spotlight even if this were true why would you want your family to be discussed so openly that? >Because it’s unforgivable and something a victim lives with every single day of their life and they are tired of being silent. >>So in your head instead of handling privately, you make it a public matter that’s not a very intelligent take to have >>>Handle it privately? He’s accused of molesting her since she was 3. Why would you want that hushed up? Perhaps you support this? >>>>How embarrassing it is that you need to let the entire Internet know about some problematic behavior that’s fucking private. Have you ever do you have no decency? Yeah, like I’m sure that’s everybody’s fucking business. Like do you know what fucking propaganda is obviously not

This article hit 1.6k+ up votes on /r/news before the mods removed it Don't forget altman owns part of reddit. And ghislaine maxwell was a moderator of many major subreddits. I might get another temp ban because I mentioned this >"ghislaine maxwell was a moderator of many major subreddits" Source + list of the subreddits >>Didn't she just straight up had a Reddit mode account ? Works on all subreddit. Surely people will reply what her username was. >>>It is just a Reddit conspiracy there is zero evidence for it. Why would she use her real last name? >>>>I guess it was because she felt safe with it knowing every tom dick and harry has the same surname. She was able boast about it in the circles where it counted, and shrug it off when she needed to because plausibly deniability. >>>>>if there's one thing thats worth boasting about in the epstein class, it's reddit karma >>>>>>The thought is icky, I really hope not. Why reddit, not X (twitter at the time) or Facebook?