• grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      2 months ago

      The world is going to be fucked by climate change way more and faster than it otherwise would have been.

    • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      2 months ago

      The US has a massive political and cultural influence all over the world. Trump’s victory will open a whole new Pandora’s box when it comes to geopolitics, climate (in)action, and support of racist, sexist and xenophobic policies. His campaign strategy will probably be used by politicians all over the world, and will embolden them to try more and more unhinged bullshit.

      I don’t know how it will personally affect you, but it probably will in many many direct and indirect ways.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          34
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          SCOTUS already effectively made him a king. The notion that we’ve got only four years of drama is incredibly optimistic.

          • Stovetop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’m hoping he just keels over by then, he can’t be long for this world at his age and at his health.

            • orclev@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Then we get who knows how many years of slightly less dramatic but significantly worse christo-fascist Vance. The US is fucked and it’s going to take a big chunk of the world with it.

              • Stovetop@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                Vance lacks the cult of personality, though. With Trump out of the picture, his former loyalists will scramble and turn on one another to fill the power vacuum.

              • AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                27
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Guess what‽ It no longer matters what Kamala would have done, she lost the election. Trump has promised to help Israel wipe Gaza off the map to end the war. Since you find his fascist antics entertaining, you’re in for that treat.

                Also, how much time do you save by not typing out “your”?

                  • AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    20
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    Nice one, are you actually 12?

                    Our choices were status quo (sending bombs and finger wagging) or fascism (turning Gaza to glass and bulldozing it so that Israel can complete their genocide and take the land for themselves). The country chose fascism. If you’re saying Trump is better in this regard, then you need to work on your critical thinking skills.

                  • atlas@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    16
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    the whole “fascism is ok as long as it affects me none” is so goddamn tiring.

                    i really hope you never have to experience it, but people like you really do not learn any other way it seems.

          • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            2 months ago

            That’s not necessarily true. Russia holds elections as well, doesn’t mean they are free and fair.

            It’s pretty naive to think that the US cannot become a de facto non-democratic state.

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Like the last couple of elections were free and democratic.

              I guess counting of the votes was.

              But the system is sufficiently rigged already, Russians just don’t bother with such complex mechanisms. Why, when you can just steal. After all, a different kind of people.

              • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I guess counting of the votes was.

                The 2000 and 2004 elections in russia are generally considered free and fair (2004 perhaps less so, but I digress). That didn’t really have an impact later on.

                But the system is sufficiently rigged already, Russians just don’t bother with such complex mechanisms. Why, when you can just steal. After all, a different kind of people.

                While I agree in general, having lived in North America for a decade (including US) and russia for over a decade, you’d be surprised about the similarities in certain (emphasis on certain, not even close to all or even many) elements of “national thinking” in the US and russia. That being said, historically US has had a positive impact in the world. I can’t think of a single thing that russia has done that has had a positive effect (even their much fetishized celebration of WW2 victory is a ruse as the USSR initially sided with the Nazis to split up Europe).

                • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  The 2000 and 2004 elections in russia are generally considered free and fair (2004 perhaps less so, but I digress). That didn’t really have an impact later on.

                  I meant 1996. Wide protests, the first election in independent Russia widely put in doubt, but in the West - lots of enthusiasm that the bad thing didn’t happen and those communists didn’t win.

                  even their much fetishized celebration of WW2 victory is a ruse as the USSR initially sided with the Nazis to split up Europe

                  I disagree. (Sorry for the very long elaboration that follows, but it’s needed, I think. Stalin’s USSR wasn’t nice, but what you said is usually part of the narrative most of which is plainly not true.)

                  The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a temporary (and very abrupt) change of policy and not what some common narratives make it seem. Soviet propaganda almost since 20s and till that short period actually portrayed Germans in some form as the main potential enemy.

                  Those Baltic countries USSR swallowed were typical fascist regimes, just small. Military aggression is not nice, but the narrative people from the Baltics love now, about how USSR was “worse than the Nazis” - well, very few Baltic Jews survived, I guess that makes their position consistent with reality, but doesn’t sell it very well to me.

                  Parts of Poland annexed were Western Ukraine and Western Belarus, and Wilno which is now part of Lithuania. And no, Polish Republic of that time wasn’t very minority-friendly. Again, not as clear-cut. There Soviet troops were really welcomed in 1939.

                  Even the Winter War was preceded by repeated offers of similar or bigger amount of territory given to Finland by USSR in exchange for what it asked, and what it asked was the really necessary territory to make Leningrad defensible from the Finnish side. It was not as barbaric and aggressive as the common narratives say as well. Karl Gustav Mannerheim, if you know who that is, not only supported accepting the deal, but was in favor of some concessions more than the minimum that USSR demanded. And after the war, forcing its victory, USSR took no more than that.

                  And Soviet Union did pay the biggest human cost of those fighting in Europe.

                  The fetish is disgusting, of course, and also anachronistic - there were no regular parades initially in celebration of that war ending, only those on November 7, and of course nobody was enthusiastic about an opportunity to “repeat it”. It was a hungry ruined country with disabled veterans in poverty, gangs of orphans, years of darkness and despair, one can say. The years between end of the war and Stalin’s death are not really remembered for anything other than that.

                  Actually for all the Cold War the USSR’s propaganda position was that it wants only peace and united humanity, and the people who want to “repeat” something are on the other side. I’d say that during the first Indochina war and even later this was, well, true.

                  • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    I am Ukrainian. So let’s just say you won’t convince me of the uncle Stalin coming to liberate eastern Europe BS narrative. I would like to invite you and your family to try and speak Ukrainian in the occupied territories.

                    A strong majority of russian are genocidal imperialists. Not because of any inherent qualities, it’s the choices they make.

                    I will just add that the russians should take ownership of the outcomes in their history (not just 1996 election, but more generally). They are not children and they need to take responsibility without looking for scapegoats as they always do.

              • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I think your confidence in this is exactly why it can happen.

                This is not some sort of secret knowledge, the topic of democracies sliding into de facto authoritarianism is a well researched topic.

                And the mode by which this happens is often slow and steady, largely driven by complacency and corruption.

                • The first step towards authoritarian is the revocation of free speach. The only people trying to control that as of present are the left. Ill start listening to what u have to say the second trump bans people speaking their minds in public or puts american citizens people in concentration camps.

                  • atlas@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    if you don’t remember, let me refresh your memory; trump was calling news outlets he didn’t agree with as “fake news”, and even went as far as kicking them out of press conferences in favour of his “approved” journalists.

                    undermining journalism is how your boy hitler started to rise to power.

                    if you don’t consider that an impingement on free speech, and you’d rather wait until he does it to the rest of the citizens, then i really have no more words for you.

                  • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    Why do you think there would a formal revocation of free speech if US did slide into authoritarian, non-democratic rule? This seems counter inuitive. Why bring attention to such a topic if your goal is limiting free speech, surely you would use other more subtle methods to achieve such a goal (again this topic is well researched and you can easily find out how it works if you are actually acting in good faith). Russia (and I believe even China) formally has free speech.

                    And what makes you think people in the US would oppose trump jailing political opponents (or let alone have the capability do anything about it)? No one is going to openly say that person X is going to jail because he opposes Trump/his backers. You would find some other reason that is easy to market to local plebs? No?

                    Am I being unreasonable in my line of thinking?

      • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Maybe not about elections, per se, but I think you forgot what happened between 2016 to 2020. Almost every day news headlines were like “Trump tweets dumb thing”, “Trump announces dumb thing”, “Trump does dumb thing”. This election period was quieter on the scale of things compared to then, and we’re headed right back for it.