368
submitted 2 years ago by withersailor@aussie.zone to c/news@beehaw.org
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] storksforlegs@beehaw.org 73 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The fact that its been so normalized to be this openly shitty and callous toward frigging children... i dont even know how to react to this any more.

Im not saying its hopeless, but I feel like a lot of people on the "lets not let children go hungry" side of the fence are almost left speechless by these idiots. But i feel like thats almost part of their strategy - stunning the opposition. There has to be a better response.

What's the best way to respond to this kind of brazen cruelty? (Besides voting and campaigning for candidates who arent sociopathic).

[-] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 26 points 2 years ago

What's the best way to respond to this kind of brazen cruelty?

Voting is a must. Political apathy is how this stuff happens. Outside of voting, just being vocal about your distaste for these policies might help let people around you know that not everyone supports this. And if you come face to face with someone who is outspoken in their belief that some children deserve to starve, then you know who to avoid being around.

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one 9 points 2 years ago

More people voted for trump after his disastrous 4 years in office than did when he first got elected. I don't think voting is the answer because we are stupid. Educating these idiots would go a long way, but they don't believe in education. Being controlled by their extended, daily, two minute hate is all they seem to know or want.

I taught at a couple school where the majority of the students got their only 2 meals a day when at school. And these fuck heads think that's too much. It makes me sick.

[-] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Voting is the answer (at least part of the answer) because it's what kept Trump out of office for another four years despite him getting all those votes. Now even more of Gen Z is voting age, as long as they vote like they did in the midterms conservatives don't have long in office. They'll have some gerrymandered strongholds like Texas and Florida but things should slowly be getting better now that more and more of the conservative voters are dying off either from old age or COVID.

Seriously these past midterms were historic, this millennial loves Gen Z lol

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That's not helping the many people being screwed over by anti-trans and anti-abortion bills, or with all of the anti-worker crap the republicans and the dems (albeit to a lesser extent) have been implementing. I'm worried it's going to be too late for a lot of people by the time things get good (not just better, actually good without 50 million horrible things going off constantly; not perfect, but not constantly under peril). Well, if they do. And of course there's the matter of climate change. I'm worried it's gonna be too late by then as well... ~Cherri

[-] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

That’s not helping the many people being screwed over by anti-trans and anti-abortion bills

A cure all does not exist unfortunately and I don't know of any solutions for the affected minorities in those areas other than leave when possible. Which is easier said than done I know, I did it with my move out of Texas.

I’m worried it’s going to be too late for a lot of people by the time things get good.

It likely is going to be too late for many groups of people, I don't like that reality but it's true. This is the shit situation our generation was given and we just have to do our best to improve it as best we can for future generations. We can only do that by fighting and not letting apathy take over.

And of course there’s the matter of climate change. I’m worried it’s gonna be too late by then as well.

Too late for what? For the environment to change? That point passed decades ago, unfortunately. We've been at the pollution game for a while. Too late to mitigate as much damage as possible? Absolutely not. The best time to plant a tree is yesterday but the next best time is today. Our planet is changing due to the actions of the old and it's on us to adapt as a society. We adapt by changing policies and we change policies by getting involved in politics, the easiest form of which is simply voting.

The future is going to be rough and certainly not what I would've chosen, but it's not untenable or unconquerable.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago

I mean like too late to mitigate it enough for it to not destroy the environment completely. And most of the pollution is not from individuals but from corporations. I mean hell, most pollution from airplanes comes from private jets. Commercial passenger planes don't do nearly as much damage as those (though they do quite a bit of damage and should be limited where possible). ~Cherri

[-] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

I mean like too late to mitigate it enough for it to not destroy the environment completely.

Except that's not a thing, it's impossible for the environment to be completely destroyed. Even when a forest turns to desert the desert is still an environment that can be adapted to and improved on. The world as we know it will change dramatically, that's just something that's unavoidable at this point. But we can help make the next version of this world the best we can.

As long as you're alive it's never too late to take action.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

A lot of species are going extinct faster than new ones are popping up. ~Cherri

[-] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

Yes, that's part of the changing world. Not something I'm happy about but something we can't change. There are projects sequencing their genome so that we can hopefully clone/revive the species at a later time however. So there are things that can be done to mitigate even those changes. Not a perfect solution but it's something.

If you truly believe there's no hope and we can't do anything to change it then I implore you to follow your own word and don't bother commenting doomerisms since it doesn't help anything.

If you want to give up, fine. Just do it by yourself. I'm going to keep fighting as long as there's life in this body.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

It's not that I think there's hope, it's that I don't know if there is, but I know this is something people have been trying for years with relatively little to show for it. ~Cherri

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one 2 points 2 years ago

Gerrymandering should have no impact on the Senate or the Executive elections, aside from the subressive effect. We still vote for geriatric vampires more often then not, and those geriatric vampires really, really can't let the new, fresh people have positions of power. We've seen that happen over and over with those who should be stars (effective stars) in Congress. I understand completely that it's better than the fucking Republicans, but it's kind of like picking what method you're going to die from. I think you're vastly underestimating the deplorable factor in the US. For once though, finally, it does seem like these younger generations are making a hard turn to do the right thing. I hope it pays off, just on a pragmatic level I think we've already passed the point of no return so I'm just watching the world slowly burn.

[-] Dee_Imaginarium@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

I think you're underestimating the effects of old generations dying off while simultaneously a supremely motivated younger generation is coming in. I'm not saying it'll be smooth sailing and that voting alone is the answer, I'm saying we have to keep fighting and voting is part of the answer. It's not the silver bullet that will solve everything but we can't move forward with fascists in office so we have to vote them out.

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one 1 points 2 years ago

Don't give my opinions too much value. I'm older and am just worn out. I remember talking to my mom (she's almost 90 now, pre-Boomer, super progressive) about this topic a couple years ago. She said when she was younger, all her friends talked about how once the older generation dies off, things would change. She brought that up because I was talking about how I was hoping that when all these old geriatric vampires die off, things would change. It's like old people bitching about back in my day...

I've pretty much become comfortable with the fact that the job, that of being a politician, just attracts the worst people, regardless of age. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, and for once it does seem like the younger generation is not following lockstep with the previous generations. Maybe because things have become so bad, it's impossible to fall for the same bullshit that my generation did. I do hope things turn around.

But as the old saying goes, you can shit in one hand and wish in the other and see which one fills up first.

[-] hadesflames@vlemmy.net 7 points 2 years ago

If only the only other option weren't also trash. Then wouldn't be so much voter apathy. The system is literally designed to be this way. The US being a democratic country is a myth. The founders never even intended it to be a democracy. They just wanted it to be their own little club. Plebs were never even meant to be able to vote.

[-] Rentlar@beehaw.org 10 points 2 years ago

The "other side" (Democrats) are still picking your pockets and laughing with rich buddies, but they aren't for letting children go hungry, get married early and work for minimum wage in all their free time. All the while getting upset at rainbows and whatever the scapegoat of the week is.

[-] SteveXVII 1 points 2 years ago

The sad part is that for the americans to do good, they have to vote democrat. I am glad I don't live there.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

We've been trying to vote and vote for decades, haven't we? When's it gonna work out? How do we make sure it's not too late for a lot of people by then, and/or too late to deal with climate change by then? ~Cherri

[-] SteveXVII 2 points 2 years ago

Not voting is not a choice, because then these bastards get even more power, it is a sad reality.

[-] hadesflames@vlemmy.net 1 points 2 years ago

You can't get more power than all of it.

[-] SteveXVII 1 points 2 years ago

As of now democrats controll the senate.

[-] hadesflames@vlemmy.net 1 points 2 years ago

The elite control the everything.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

That doesn't answer any of my questions. ~Cherri

[-] SteveXVII 1 points 2 years ago

It is working out, if I am not mistaken, each setback the republicans suffer slows them down in making the US more awful, it is just hard to notice. The political system is trapped in a two-paty-system where both parties are corporate puppets. Without a new Ross Perrot there is no hope of changing that.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

So it's not working out. The way you're putting it just sounds like this is hopeless and delaying the inevitable. ~Cherri

[-] SteveXVII 1 points 2 years ago

Unless:

  1. A politician shows up that can actually change course.
  2. Enough folks vote to put a halt to this and perhaps even reverse it. Delaying it might be a first step.
  3. Protests put enough pressure on them to stop.

Civil rights movements have been succesful in the past, and letting it slip is just a waste.

[-] Spitfire@pawb.social 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It’s really hard to convince people that voting matters. And in many places, the districts are set up in such a way that it favors a certain party’s outcome.

Republicans seem to be more popular with older people, who also are more likely to be voting. Younger people are much less likely to participate.

Personally I’m pretty sick of it all myself. I still vote though. I just wish that it wasn’t all about arguments between parties and we could focus on what’s best for people.

[-] polygon@beehaw.org 22 points 2 years ago

Listen, this is hard thing for me to type but I think is relevant to the Republican mindset. Hundreds of children are being murdered in their classrooms. Literal murder. Of children. This is not enough to sway Republicans on gun control. If actual murder of 6 year olds doesn't have any effect on them, surely 6 year olds being hungry is not even going to make them blink. This is the reality with these people. They simply do not care about you, or your children, and everything they do is governed only by money and power.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Why do they prioritize money and power over the welfare of society? What makes them think it's a good idea? ~Cherri

[-] polygon@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Because that is the goal of any totalitarian regime. You think Putin has the welfare of his country in mind? Or Kim Jong Un? No. Money and Power is the only goal. There was an article recently on North Koreans saying how they're starving and just waiting to die. The people are simply the means to generate wealth and exercise power. Their welfare has nothing to do with it.

I used to think the Republicans were wannabe dictators, but in the last few years they've demonstrated that they are actual fascists and a dictatorship is their endgame. There is no way to deny this anymore. If people tell you who they are, you should listen to them. Republicans are no longer hiding it.

[-] ArcticCircleSystem@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

I know that's their goal but it doesn't explain why that's their goal. ~Cherri

[-] nzodd@beehaw.org 17 points 2 years ago

Oh this is nothing by comparison. Republicans also vote to legalize child rape (which they preciously insist on calling "child marriage") and are trying to bring back child labor because adults are getting fed up with unfair labor practices while little kids are easier to manipulate.

[-] Kiwiapple87@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

I would say it would be the education of the American people. That stuff like this should be at the top of just about every news program out there.

What sucks is that most people in America, red and blue, are probably not even aware that this is happening. If more people knew what was going on then maybe things like this would stop because of either people voting these politicians out or causing so much outrage they change their minds.

[-] CeruleanRuin@lemmy.one 6 points 2 years ago

Many people who don't interact with schools or kids in general don't think about them at all, except as a tax burden and a political football. It's a sickness on this country.

[-] closure1170@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago

Chapter 1: The Power of Love Chapter 2: ...

[-] AbidanYre@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Is a curious thing... Wait, is that not what you meant?

[-] Mummelpuffin@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago

Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.

Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.

I'm lefty as fuck and I still kind of empathize with people who consider themselves conservative being seriously over people characterizing literally any conservative action they take as cartoonishly evil.

[-] TechyDad@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

And you're missing that, without the free meals being available to everyone, there's a negative social stigma to getting the free school lunches. Kids skip the meals because they don't want to be seen as "that poor kid." This leads to them going hungry, not doing well in school, and not having as many chances to break the cycle of poverty.

By opening the free school lunches to everyone, the stigma is removed. If Billy gets a free school lunch, he might be poor or his parents just might be having him get the school lunches instead of packing something. Without the social stigma, kids who need the lunches are more likely to get them and more kids are fed.

[-] Mummelpuffin@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Aight, cool, but that doesn't change that this comment section is operation on the assumption that you're dealing with people who understand that and literally enjoy making children starve. This sort of characterization is rampant in politics and a total anathema to actual discussion or ever getting anything done.

[-] TechyDad@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago

Given that other Republican proposals involve keeping child marriage legal and opening child labor laws back up so that kids can work dangerous jobs without the companies involved being liable for their safety, it's not a huge leap from "Republicans want to cut free school meals" to "Republicans want kids to starve."

Maybe it's a not a 100% real leap, but it's one that the Republicans have set themselves up for.

this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
368 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22096 readers
88 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS