End Times Internet Content

I don't think the LOLs came from people wanting to be 'political', but laughing at the absurdism of the situation and the hubris of the founder/most of the passengers.

the only reason people keep pointing out "hey, seriously, fuck this guy!" is in response to the "guys, we should be better than this" self-serving piety that emerged all over the web a few days ago.

I mean, I do think there is value in pointing out "hey guys, this is the type of person who gets hard-working civilians killed on a daily basis, and usually there's no repercussions for their regulation-defying, cost-cutting measures, but hey, this time - there were!"

― sad Mings of dynasty (Neanderthal), Saturday, 24 June 2023 14:22 (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

think this is otm really

Yes! Love the sinner, hate the sin… but mostly love the sinner. This is how I was raised. I still think this is a good perspective.

Love loves to love love — james joyce. A fellow heretic raised in the jesuit tradition

I understand this makes people cringe uncontrollably.

― treeship., Friday, June 23, 2023 3:38 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

cringe is fine! i'm basically pro-cringe

i came from a similar background as you, honestly. my grandfather was a lawyer who graduated from a jesuit law college. it case kind of a long shadow over our family.

i don't have a problem with jesuit ideals. what i do have a problem with is the way i've seen catholic ideals play out in practice. frankly seeing people do moral philosophy while looking the other way at child abuse has made me very skeptical of principled people their principles.

it's something i've struggled with for a long time. i've had a long, i don't know, i guess you might call it a "spiritual journey" if you were so inclined.

and where i wound up, is in 2016, i was an episcopalian, and a lot of my approach to, i don't know, ethics, morality, whatever, is shaped by that experience and seeing how that played out in practice. their philosophy, their approach towards things, was very similar to what you are espousing here. i liked them, really. they were kind, compassionate, their intentions were good.

in practice, though... i mean, when you want to love everybody, you wind up making a lot of compromises. so one of the clergy at the church was a lesbian, and she wasn't exactly _closeted_, but she was very careful about the circumstances in which she talked about that. because, you know, some people at the church weren't really cool with the homosexuals, and you don't want to cause friction, you don't want to cause controversy. i mean most of the people there were older people, younger people tend not to... find a home in organized religion.

and that's the thing, you can "welcome everybody" but that doesn't mean everybody will show up. and to me, particularly when you're dealing with mainline protestantism which is, you know, clearly dying, i was interested in... i mean i had no scope, i thought _everything_ was within my sphere of interest and influence. so it was a concern for me, why is mainline protestantism dying? these are good people! they have good values! they preach and practice love! why is the face of christianity hatred and bigotry rather than love and kindness?

and ultimately i decided the flaw was that, like. they were trying to build a community that consisted of both queer people and people who wanted queer people dead. even when i was just a "really good ally", to me, that seemed like a problem. i'm a data analyst and to me things like boundaries, scope, are really relevant, but they're also relevant in my personal life. i was raised in a sort of universalist belief system, everything was my responsibility, everything was my _business_, that was the liberalism i learned and embraced, even though i wouldn't have named it as such.

another thing i was taught was that, you know, the community of christians, we are the body of christ. it's no use sitting around waiting for miracles, _we_ are the miracle, _we_ are the love of jesus christ, with _us_, all things are possible.

in retrospect, it's really obvious to me that i was playing god. there are a _hell of a lot of things_ that aren't possible. and one of those things, one of those things is having a community of _everyone_. as humans, we need boundaries. we need to understand what we can do, whose lives we can ultimately transform.

i've touched a lot of lives, like, i don't know how many people there are out there who believe that i literally changed their life. and i understand that in theory but in practice, i'm just out here being me. that's all i can really do, i've worked in ways that are obvious and perhaps less obvious to transform myself, and if other people see that and transform themselves, that brings me joy. yeah, i am being the change i want to see in the world, sure, but at the same time i'm not out to change the world. i've tried taking that on and it fucked me up and it hurt me. science won't change them, looks like i can't change them.

loving other people, i did that in a way that hurt me and didn't help them. and so i had to change how i loved. i don't love everybody equally. i don't feel like i can do that. i don't have infinite love. i'm not god. and even those people i love most, if they do things that are wrong, well, i have to let them do that _and_ let them face the consequences.

and that's what love looks like to me. maybe that's horrifying to you, but i think... in the long run, it's helpful to understand that we all have limits, even our love, it has to have limits or it's not love, it's poison.

Also, in honor of this revive, I have had ChatGPT write an op-ed in the style of William F. Buckley, Jr. on this topic:

The Coarsening of Society: A Harbinger of the End Times

By William F. Buckley, Jr.

In the annals of human history, there have always been moments that reflect the moral decay and decline of a civilization. These moments serve as stark reminders that we are inching closer to the precipice of societal collapse. One such moment, tragically highlighted recently, is the callous and tasteless jesting surrounding the deaths of billionaires in the Titan submarine implosion.

We find ourselves living in an era where mockery and derision have become tools of amusement and entertainment. The boundaries of decency and respect have been eroded, making way for a culture that revels in the misfortune of others, particularly those who have achieved great success. It is a sad commentary on our times when the demise of human beings is met with jeering laughter and gleeful celebration.

The billionaire victims of the Titan submarine implosion were not just individuals who amassed vast fortunes; they were human beings with families, friends, and aspirations. They were pioneers who, through their ingenuity and hard work, contributed to the betterment of society in various ways. To reduce their deaths to a punchline is a grave disservice to their legacies and an affront to the very principles upon which our civilization was built.

The crux of the matter lies not solely in the jokes themselves, but rather in what they signify—a coarsening of our collective moral fiber. We have become desensitized to the suffering of others, finding amusement in their pain, regardless of their station in life. This is indicative of a society teetering on the precipice of its own demise. When empathy and compassion are supplanted by cruelty and indifference, we risk losing our humanity and the values that have sustained us for centuries.

Moreover, the jests about the billionaire deaths in the Titan submarine implosion reveal a deeper malaise—the growing resentment and envy towards those who have achieved extraordinary success. Rather than celebrating their accomplishments, we have succumbed to a toxic narrative that vilifies wealth and denigrates success. This divisive rhetoric only serves to exacerbate the fractures within our society, pitting us against each other and sowing the seeds of discontent and discord.

It is essential to remember that a society's strength lies in its ability to foster a spirit of aspiration and achievement, not in tearing down those who have succeeded. Mocking the deaths of billionaires, or anyone for that matter, undermines the very fabric of our civilization. It is a testament to our moral bankruptcy and our inability to appreciate the virtues of dignity, empathy, and respect.

The jokes about the tragic deaths of billionaires in the Titan submarine implosion should be seen as a wake-up call, a warning sign that we are drifting perilously close to the edge. As conservatives, we must be the custodians of our cultural values and defend the principles that have made our civilization great. We must reject the corrosive forces of cynicism and degradation, replacing them with a renewed commitment to decency, compassion, and intellectual rigor.

Let us stand against the coarsening of our society and resist the temptation to revel in the misfortune of others. We must strive for a higher standard, one that upholds the dignity and worth of every human life. For if we fail to do so, we risk consigning ourselves to the depths of our own demise—the end times of a civilization that lost sight of its own humanity.

Just here to pop in and say that by virtue of their wealth and hubris, the imploded submarine people were actually committing violence— their wealth came only at the suffering of others, and any other way of looking at it is completely off-the-charts bullshit

it’s end times internet content not because people are being “mean” but because how did so many people get “hypnotized” into caring about this shit??????

compulsive opinion having and sharing

xp many people have retirement funds and things wrapped up in all kinds of unethical businesses. Few are not implicated in the violence of wealth extraction. Where is the line where people become “responsible” for it to the point where we dehumanize them?

I mean, whatever. Absent an actual movement for socialism throwing stones at rich people seems useless and not even political.

Sorry our memes didn't amount to Tiananmen Square.

We tried

xp many people have retirement funds and things wrapped up in all kinds of unethical businesses. Few are not implicated in the violence of wealth extraction. Where is the line where people become “responsible” for it to the point where we dehumanize them?

i mean there isn't a _line_, why do you need there to be a _line_? are you worried that you'll end up on the wrong side of it? i mean i can understand the base fear here. first they came for the billionaires, then they came for the millionaires, then they came for me and there were no billionaires to speak for me or whatever. you're not, though, a temporarily embarrassed billionaire. you're not. i'm just going to assume that everybody here is part of the oppressed underclass and people who think spending $250 million dollars to go underwater in an incredibly poorly designed submersible are not.

i'm not saying that to dehumanize the dead people. they're human beings. i mean what i'm getting here is that you have a hard time thinking of yourself as being fundamentally in solidarity with people who openly celebrate the deaths of other human beings. is that a fair way of putting it?

i think that's a valid concern and a concern worth dealing with. i mean that's what part of an "actual movement for socialism" looks like, it does require _sides_. you gotta be able to advocate for _us_ versus _them_. and yeah that's uncomfortable, that's uncomfortable for me. i'd prefer to think that there is no "us" and "them", but when it comes to issues of systemic justice, i just don't think the evidence supports that. and you can say, you know, a plague on both your houses, and stand where? stand with who? by myself i'm very weak. very vulnerable. i need people i trust.

memes aren't a revolution. memes aren't a substitute for justice, schadenfreude isn't a substitute for justice, but i think memes have a better chance of getting us there than trying to treat everybody equally. someone like, say, f.d. signifier, his voice isn't as powerful as jeff bezos, and to me that's a perversion of justice, his voice should be _more_ powerful than bezos.

i mean in some sense memes are the voice of the unheard. and if wishing violence on billionaires leads to violence against billionaires... to be blunt i'm basically ok with that. because right now, systems of power and the people who control them are inflicting a lot of violence on a lot of people i care about. getting people like, well, not to point fingers but people like _you_ to recognize that is important and it's frustrating and it's really, really hard. and it's not something i have any control over, ultimately. i recognize that. you have control over your own life. i think it would be nice, though, for us to be on the same side, despite any differences we have. because socialist revolution needs a _lot of people_ to support it, it's not something i'm personally going to lead. it's not _my_ revolution.

Kate otm

compared to the condescending platitudes of "thoughts and prayers", to me a lot of the ribbing is the opposite of de-humanizing -- pointing out someone's incongruously absurd cartoon-like behavior doesn't really work without the base assumption that that person is a human being.

and in terms of having a meaningful effect on the world, I'm pretty convinced whatever twitter warriors kept Trump's thumbs busy bloviating instead of on some nuclear football is pretty meaningful!

in line with that, for me the humanizing thing about cracking jokes in this situation is that it highlights the law that "actions matter," a law that many people are flouting today, causing very real damage to a great number of people, species, etc. sure most of us are complicit to an extremely small degree or whatever, but we're all going to need to believe in "actions matter" if we want to believe in ourselves and our future here imo. a billionare paying 250 million to go undersea in a broken tin can is funny, their death is funny, and it feels good to joke about it because the balance there is sooo far off of "actions matter" that it feels good to see the pendulum swing the other way for once, because there is a great amount of energy in the world today being dedicated to making it seem like actions don't matter, that only the market matters. the cynical side here is the one that begs us to keep suspending our belief in actions mattering, to deny the material reality and limits and wealth we all share together.

Good discussion. I am also starting to remember something else I take issue with, a certain prominent strain of religious opinion that it is just as bad to think something or by extension to say something as to do it, and it fact is worse if one is not right with the man upstairs as who among us etc.

And so making fun of the arrogant I Know Better Than the Experts sunk CEO is in fact even more arrogant, DO U SEE?

Every day as Warren G

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0LeL9BUPtA

We might need a thread devoted to making fun of billionaires killed doing risky/dumb shit:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/26/business/james-crown-obit/index.html

Is this a trend? Let's hope so.

Among his many roles, Crown was chairman and CEO of his family business, the investment firm Henry Crown and Company. In addition to serving on the JPMorgan board, he was also a board director at General Dynamics. Crown had served on JPMorgan’s board since the early 1990s.

The longer I ponder this trend, the more I find that I'm agin' it. Billionaires stupidly killing themselves en masse seems like a net positive on the face of it until you consider the billions that will then be siphoned to their Blink*182 fail(step)sons. It's an imperfect world but it can always be imperfect-er.