Sources:
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/doge-staffer-out-after-soc...
>"Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool.” -@nullllptr
>“Normalize Indian hate." -@nullllptr
>"You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity." -@nullllptr
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50695593
>"Pedo guy." -Elon Musk
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/elon-musk-transgender...
>"not a girl" -Elon Musk
>[Musk's own daughter] Wilson, 20, in an exclusive interview with NBC News, responded to comments Musk made Monday about her and her transgender identity. On social media and in an interview posted online, Musk said she was “not a girl” and was figuratively “dead,” and he alleged that he had been “tricked” into authorizing trans-related medical treatment for her when she was 16.
>“I was in fourth grade. We went on this road trip that I didn’t know was actually just an advertisement for one of the cars — I don’t remember which one — and he was constantly yelling at me viciously because my voice was too high,” she said. “It was cruel.”
>“I no longer live with or wish to be related to my biological father in any way, shape or form,” she said in the court filing.
>“I lost my son, essentially,” Musk said. He used Wilson’s birth name, also known as a deadname for transgender people, and said she was “dead, killed by the woke mind virus.”
>And in a post on X, Musk said Monday that Wilson was “born gay and slightly autistic” and that, at age 4, she fit certain gay stereotypes, such as loving musicals and using the exclamation “fabulous!” to describe certain clothing. Wilson told NBC News that the anecdotes aren’t true, though she said she did act stereotypically feminine in other ways as a child.
>“He doesn’t know what I was like as a child because he quite simply wasn’t there,” she wrote. “And in the little time that he was I was relentlessly harassed for my femininity and queerness.”
>“I’ve been reduced to a happy little stereotype,” she continued. “I think that says alot about how he views queer people and children in general.”
There are a hell of a lot of easily verified sources about YOU knowingly spreading false and defamatory claims, and a huge detailed and well documented dossier full of citations about your rampant unhinged obsessive vandalism on Wikipedia.
Crypto Crime Cartel: Greg Maxwell—the Bitcoin vandal
https://coingeek.com/crypto-crime-cartel-greg-maxwell-the-bi...
You're also quite well known as a Wikipedia vandal, too:
User:Gmaxwell
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Adminis...
>(Copied from WP:AN/3RR, because there were edits that amounted to vandalism, as well as excessive reverting)
>He has reverted Template:User freedom seven times despite repeated calls to stop from multiple editors. The version he is reverting to is far different from what the creators and users intended it for. I consider these edits to be an act of vandalism.--God of War 05:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
>I'm also surprised by the length of the block, because he was engaged in vandalism, not just edit warring. I'd block him myself but I was involved in a dispute with him over an image recently. Three examples of the edits I see as vandalism: he changed a box supporting the American military to one supporting the Iraqi insurgents. [36] He inserted an image of a woman "hogtied" and gagged into a box opposing fox hunting, and changed the fox hunting link to BDSM. [37] On Template:Wikiproject Terrorism, he replaced the image of a terrorist with one of a nuclear explosion. [38] SlimVirgin (talk) 12:22, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
And your history of baselessly accusing other people of taking drugs, right after raging when somebody accused you of using drugs:
An insight into the mind of Greg Maxwell, (Nullc) one of the founders of Blockstream:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/kn25yb/comment/ghij1eo...
>It's funny because he raged when someone accused him of using drugs and in this very thread he accuses someone of using drugs.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/kn25yb/an_insight_into...
>I think they call that being hypocritical or having sensitive skin. You decide. He can dish it out but not take it himself.
>And lastly since this is the most recent event Greg Maxwell was again trying to make waves here and false claims that he was banned in r/btc and had a big out with BicoinXio about 1-2 months back leading to BitcoinXio's ban. Basically Maxwell accused r/btc of being censored which he could have proved simply by showing us a single comment posted in r/btc from his profile that wasn't showing in r/btc. He could not. BitcoinXio naturally made him a laughing stock and got mass reported by bots. However before he was banned, he sent me the private conversation from Nullc and him where Maxwell claimed automoderator was censoring him. DM me and I'll link you the conversation showing Maxwell's true colors and his accusations of him getting banned and the content which he most likely used to get BitcoinXio banned. It's actually quite hilarious to see Nullc acting so calm in public and then going irate with his false accusations and BitcoinXio making him look like the joke he is.
On Greg Maxwell, co founder of Blockstream, and the man who helped cripple Bitcoin:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/e9gw8k/on_greg_maxwell...
>I'm talking about the Greg who using his very own guilty by association logic, that Greg Maxwell and Adam Back were associated and therefore guilty of being involved with the Bitfinex hacking.
Reddit Bitcoin Mods and Gregory Maxwell Accused of False Flag Bot Attack and Hacking:
https://www.trustnodes.com/2017/11/22/reddit-bitcoin-mods-gr...
>"We have a surprisingly large amount of evidence indicating that 4n4n4 is [Gregory Maxwell], the CTO of Blockstream."
Falsely accuse me of whatever you like, because you've already thoroughly discredited yourself with your own decades-long well-documented track record of false words and unethical deeds, knowingly spreading lies and defamatory claims.
There are SO MANY other sources I could link to showing you repeatedly beclowning yourself, regularly and obsessively and emotionally unhinged, spreading false and defamatory claims, being intimately involved as CTO of an infamous crypto scam company that helped launder Epstein's money, and other charming stuff like that, but these are enough sources for now. Only since you DEMANDED sources from me.
Cruelty is the point.
Chaos is the point.
Stupidity is the point.
Lies are the point.
Racism/anti-“different” (including different ideas) is the point.
Impunity is the point.
Destruction is the point.
What they have in common are in-our-face demonstrations of centralizing power, designed to encourage their base vicariously while stealing their lunch.
And discourage, silence, excommunicate, dis-home and dis-connect any competent detractors in any branch of government or appropriately hard news.
They know the value of cutting the cost of everything, with no concept of the loss of value sans anything.
It isn’t at all difficult to recognize. It shouldn’t be hard to understand either. It is a very effective way to centralize power by replacing institutions with pawns.
Nor is the chaos being inflicted on those same institutions by targeted and random decrees. That many are vague and unbalancing is intentional. The aim isn’t to improve them, right-size them, or accomplish any national mission, etc. That would be a disaster if that was his goal. It is to kill any resistance to Trump in a way the constitution really has no effective response for.
As his power centralizes he will use his increased power to go after the next level of “threats” to his unmitigated power.
Where this stops, isn’t predictable. But given the chance, he won’t stop.
Regardless of your politics, it is an interesting historical moment, and worth seeing clearly. Trump is largely competently centralizing power to a degree we have not seen since Washington was given the greenfield mandate in which to oversee the raising up of our Constitutional institutions. An ironic difference from now.
If you want to understand the challenges and means of accruing power (with non-partisan, non-current-event nuance, and as it applies in any form of government), I recommend:
The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics [0]
It says “Dictator’s” but the book covers every type of government and the principles and resulting plays apply to all.
And there is always Machiavelli.
If concerned people debate future risks instead, the other team has scored an A+.
If you want to mitigate what had happened, you need to bring your own extremely resourced criminals. I really feel sorry for all affected.
I have a very pro-technology worldview. I'm independent leaning left but I thought that Democrats have been extreme, wasteful and untrustworthy in their own ways.
It's very unfortunate that this stuff like efficiency and technology integration is now associated so closely with neo-Nazis. Maybe I just didn't want to believe it. But when Musk did those Hitler salutes, I had to accept a new reality.
I don't think cutting programs or screwing up code is our main worry. The Secretary of Defense is literally an alcoholic neo-Nazi Crusader who talks about almost nothing besides getting rid of affirmative action and how evil Muslims are.
I am scared that they will actually try to deport millions of people, there could be massive detainment camps that become concentration camps. You only need a lack of food and one or two really serious neo-Nazis for that to become a death camp.
I am also afraid that they might trigger WWIII, fully fueled by racial hatred and dehumanization of Chinese people.
I am almost scared to write posts like this because who knows if they will start hunting down people from the internet.
Do not mistake the Nazi's too. They were very efficient and highly organized. IBM played a great role in delivering the tech the Nazi's needed.
I don't think “efficiency and technology integration” is. I think DOGE is because its being done by neo-Nazis and in support of a blatantly fascist administration and doing things that look a lot more like ideological censorship and corrupt self-dealing than efficiency and technical integration, including specifically targeting things in government that actually did efficiency and technical integration.
DOGE is a farce and I hate that I have to type the name of a joke from 2009 because Elon is a child and Trump is a crook.
What?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/09/nyregion/chan-china-nyc-i...
Blue team also required a bunch of thought-killing exercises and public signalling of things that are clearly inefficient and intellectually bankrupt and dishonest--this drove away a lot of smart people that actually wanted to get shit done, and made it easy for red team to point over and say "see, they're lying/delusional/woke?" as covering fire when red team pushed for their own odious agendas.
Blue team also not only failed to address issues but deliberately lied about them: the immigration crisis was pilloried when Trump wanted to build a wall, but once Biden took power a few weeks later suddenly _then_ the immigration crisis was a real policy concern. When people were complaining about the cost of food and goods, that was silly--but now that Trump's in power, suddenly we are told to care again. The attempted manufacturing of consent by the media on the left (and to be clear, red team does the same thing) is now too obvious not to be used against them.
Given all of this:
* Things aren't as bad as they're being made out to be, though they are serious.
* There is an entire industry relying on your fear and anxiety to exist, so practice good information hygiene.
* Maybe look beyond the obvious labels (woke, Nazi, marxist, fascist) to understand what's actually going on--don't be intellectually lazy.
* Revisit the things you think you know and why they're Good or not--and consider what others would think of them (for example, we can't both talk about how it's only a matter of years that "white" will be a minority in the US and that that's a good thing _and also_ claim that reactionary concerns about replacement are wholly unfounded).
Good luck to you.
* What is a neo-Nazi? What does that look like? What do they believe? Is there a better, more accurate term to use?
* What is a race-fueled WWIII? What is the difference between declaring war on a country and declaring war on a race? Who would be fighting--if it's just two countries, it's not really a world war. What would be the reason to go to war?
* What is the relative population of Latinos in the US as a percent, compared with Jews in Germany at the time? What is the geographic distribution of those folks compared to Jews at the time? What is the representation of Latinos in Congress?
* What differences, if any, exist in the economic position of Jews in Germany vs Latinos in the US?
I think it's important to see, truly, what the parallels are before just going "Think of the parallels!"--it's not none, but it's also worth evaluating on its own merits.
How is that relevant?
> it's also worth evaluating on its own merits.
But why do it in the form of a riddle?
The thing that user is concerned about seems to be trying to decide if we're looking at another Holocaust. It seems reasonable to check to see if the preconditions are similar.
> But why do it in the form of a riddle?
It's not a riddle, it's an invitation to set a baseline to discuss from that's not just "the world is scary and we're looking at another Holocaust".
If somebody says the world is scary and they want reassurance, we can't just go "no the world isn't scary it's gonna be fine"--we have to explain _why_ the world isn't scary, and to do that we need shared understanding.
It's not helpful if, for example, they mean Nazi in the general sloppy sense ("thugs and bigots that seek power") and I use Nazis in a very particular sense (a group desirous of annexing Sudetenland and Alsace–Lorraine, seeking to restore German and Austrian economic power, scapegoating particular minorities and progressive values for cultural corruption, a reliance on a patchwork of occult and mystical foundations for rallying, etc.).
So, I didn't ask "riddles": I asked a bunch of questions to see where they were coming from before making an argument one way or the other. I wish more folks did this in the years leading up to the current situation, but here we are.
I know. And I ask how that is relevant, how any answer to those particular question would makes them similar or dissimilar. It's not. I know this for a fact, but you didn't even make the attempt to claim otherwise.
It's not about absolute or relative numbers. And it's not about knowing the future.
If I say "don't fall asleep with a cigarette", do I mean "don't burn yourself", "don't kill yourself", "don't burn down your house", "don't burn down the block", "don't burn down the city", or "don't burn down the continent"?
If you can't see how the implementation of a Holocaust in the US might be impacted by the distribution and population density of Latinos I can't help you.
Some of the estimates I've seen for 1930s Germany were that Jews were less than 1% of the population; by contrast, Latinos are far beyond that--something like 40% in Texas and California.
A big part of the Holocaust was the targeted persecution and removal and ultimate execution of Jews, right? This was greatly aided by the fact that there were so few of them, and the Nazis were able to pin a bunch of ills of the time upon them. It's a lot easier to other a group when there are only a few representatives around.
My assertion--if you agree with the numbers earlier, which to me seem to be about the right near order of magnitude--is that we're not going to see that here in the US with Latinos (or Blacks, or most other groups) in the same way, and so fears of a Holocaust against those groups are likely unfounded.
Now, this isn't to say that there aren't a dozen other problems that could pop up, or that perhaps it might take a form wholly different than history--but the assertion was "we have lots of parallels to the Holocaust's preconditions" and I think that is (mercifully) one of the few things we don't have to worry about.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Popehat%27s%...
Popehat's Law of Goats
He who fucks goats, either as part of a performance or to troll those he deems has overly delicate sensibilities is simply, a goatfucker.
"He claimed he was just pretending to be racist to trigger the social justice warriors, but even if he is telling the truth, Popehat's Law of Goats still applies."
If you're referring to Musk or the current administration, calling them names doesn't really seem to have worked for what, at least nine years now?
I did not claim that their concerns about replacement were well-founded, merely that they were understandable. Again, go back and read what I actually wrote: we cannot both acknowledge that there is a decline in the proportion of whites in America, that there are policies being pursued that help with this (again, no moral judgement, simply a statement of fact), and also that the people who are scared about losing majority status are completely without basis in their concerns.
If you cannot understand the tiny pier of truth that these people use as a foundation for the massive pile of other nonsense they've stacked (or had stacked) upon it, you will never be able to get them to change.
I'm not asking you to agree with them. I'm not asking you to say that the whole of their beliefs makes any sense at all.
I'm asking you to understand that they aren't pulling this completely out of thin air, and that if you want to have more success than you've had it may be worth it to acknowledge their concerns and try to show how your preferred policies would serve them better and how their current preferred bozos are manipulating them.
You and people like you might assert that they're idiots, misinformed, evil, or whatever else--but their vote counts as much as yours, sometimes moreso, and so you ignore or misunderstand them at your peril.
Government services should be efficient, but that should never happen at the cost of being independent from the people in office, transparent, auditable, secure, and accountable.
I've worked for both. I have seen massive waste in business, millions spent for no gain, staff employed to build a manager's empire, not to do anything that was actually needed and other terrible outcomes. Obviously that also happens in government too, although the bigger problem there was a whole bunch of lazy staff who were hard to fire.
But... A business can largely choose its market and optimise for that. A government cannot - it has to work for pretty much everyone. Business can choose to skirt the law or even break it. Government departments must comply with all law to the best of their ability.
Not saying there are no ways to improve government efficiency. But the people who think you just need a business approach (unless you just want to break it all) are deluded.
Whereas with businesses they could go out of business if they overspend on inefficient processes and there can be competition on both quality and price.
One of the root causes is that it's very difficult to fire government employees for bad performance so that's why government services suck and cost a lot in almost every level of the government and in pretty much every country with some exceptions, like say the NTSB in the US.
It's not even that low performers should all be fired, but the fact that knowing you it's hard to get fired leads to many people underperforming given natural psychology. The other problem being lack of incentives tied to performance.
I have not really seen more motivated people in business due to performance incentives. Even in the financial sector, other than maybe traders and quants, I can tell you most people don't work harder because of the annual bonus.
It was certainly a bit dispiriting working with the minority of people who appeared to do absolutely nothing and just hung around for years. We all knew we had to work harder because of them. Some of them would definitely have been fired in a business.
I just emailed my representative (Mike Lawler) and I suggest everyone who's concerned about this activity and capable of offering compelling insights into why this activity (active data breach) is so concerning do the same. Perhaps they're somehow blissfully unaware of the security implications of these folks accessing data (it's only read-only access, though, so don't worry! /s), copying it to ... wherever?, running it through ChatGPT or tinkering in production on critical Cobol systems is and we can enlighten them.
If they hadn't already obviously ceded that title before 2025, they certainly did when over a thousand duly convicted violent partisan offenders were pardoned.
These weren't just random people, they were accomplices of the person who pardoned them.
We're in an autocratic United States now, where no crime, no matter how violent, committed by members of the regime will be prosecuted.
This is especially true if the courts roll over and reverse the Impoundment Act, which is exactly what the Project 2025 author and OMB nominee is pushing for. The president would be able to bankrupt any State, any entity that relies on federal funding, regardless of the wishes of Congress.
And arguably they could just do it: ignore any court judgment, and watch Congress do nothing. We know he won't ever be impeached and removed, so it's sort of a foregone conclusion that impoundment power can be seized at any time.
He is in a D+3 district that usually votes Democratic. That would usually moderate him. But see above about he would have to first survive a primary.
There's a word for achieving political ends via violence or the threat of violence. We should've been using that word heavily then, and we should be using it heavily now.
Our only hope is that the Cheeseburgers and high cholesterol gets the best of Trump.
And that Democrats grow a spine.
Cholesterol getting the best of Trump isn't going to derail this, since Vance is more than happy to continue the amassing of unchecked executive power.
"You won't have to vote again."
You see how quickly MAGA voters went from “America first. No foreign entanglements” to “let’s send troops to the Middle East to clear out Gaza” as soon as Trump said we should do so?
Anytime that Trump hasn’t been on the ballot since 2018, Trump voters stayed home.
Presidents have always been about personality and not policy. Biden and Bush I being the exception in my lifetime - or at least since Reagan.
This is why there's an effort to centralize power in the executive at a blistering pace, so the opposition can be permanently defeated even without Trump.
Watch for three things: ignoring the courts, snuffing out the influence of non-party sources of authority (the press, academic institutions), and centralization of police power. I don't think they're going to wait past April before they do all three.
I’m not saying another Republican will never win. But they will be your bland mostly inoffensive Republicans like Haley (2024), McCain, Romney, Bush I and II and Dole.
You might disagree with them on policy around the edges. But they won’t bring the destruction of Trump.
Desantis tries his best to be Trump and he flamed out marvelously on the stage. Even in Florida (where I live), he is losing his grip on the legislature.
I worry if it goes back to business as usual, it's just ripe for the next generation of con artists to show up and we'll go through this all over again.
Yes, it takes time. But right now, DOGE seems like a huge security risk for the USG what with it setting up backdoors everywhere, and with unvetted staff working for it.