41
Framework supporting far-right racists?
(community.frame.work)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2025
41 points (82.5% liked)
Technology
78179 readers
319 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Phew, for a second I thought Framework had actually done something bad. But its just supporting Hyprland which is somehow considered a far right racist project because an unpaid moderator was transphobic in a discord server. People are really trying to squeeze everything they can from this discord drama that happened years ago.
Or, you know, they are sponsoring a) a white supremacists who believes in the white replacement conspiracy theory who's in charge of omarchy and b) the project lead of (not just a discord mod) of hyperland. Two awful people that Framework absolutely deserve flack for supporting.
It’s only Hyperland, not ~~the distro~~ Omarchy.
They explicitly stated that they provided free hardware to Omarchy
Is that sponsoring though?
Yes? How could it not be?
It's both projects, lead by two different problematic people that Framework are sponsoring.
There's this huge movement in online spaces lately to bash any and all positions and opinions by calling them transphobic.
Vote right? Transphobic. Vote left? Transphobic. Abstain from voting? Transphobic. Support a company? Transphobic. Boycott a company? Transphobic. Indifferent about a company? Transphobic.
The simplest explanation is a bunch of right-wingers are trying to make the term meaningless. Anyway, nowadays when I hear someone is transphobic, I make sure to wait for solid evidence before changing my opinions.
That is correct.
Yes agreed but if you read the whole thing...
There are people in online spaces that just slap the term on ANY opinion.
Want to form a coalition with moderates? Must be transphobic. Refuse to vote Dem because they're not progressive enough? Must be transphobic.
Bluesky is overrun with them. I'd hoped to find a place here where simply existing wasn't stigmatized, but these downvotes are telling me maybe Lemmy is overrun too...
I get your point with the rest but...
Yeah, it kinda is? That's a core plank of the MAGA platform; it's practically inseparable. Unless you're talking non-USA parties but then there's still a better chance than none it's a yes.
I don't even think it "kinda is" I think it fully is. Trans rights are currently against tradition and the status quo, this makes trans rights a progressive topic until the day that trans people are so established in the history of a society that it can't be argued being trans is some new disorder or something.
I hope that one day Trans rights will have been so established globally that to challenge them is anti tradition and uncouth
What rights don't trans people have? What rights is anyone trying to take away from trans people? I still haven't seen an actual answer to this since the "trans rights are human rights" slogan became a thing.
It has to do with a phenomenon that is censored in most online spaces, so I'll spell it out in capitals, aSjUrIbCoIgDaEl, basically if a person being denied care would cause them to off themselves, then denying care is tantamount to manslaughter.
Post-transition people are reportedly much happier than they were pre-transition, but right-wingers find that icky, so they'd rather commit war crimes than allow medicine to go to those who need it.
People who vote for a particular party generally don't agree with 100% of that party's platform. Just because someone voted for a party that has transphobia-motivated policies doesn't mean they are transphobic. The correlation may be high, but it's far from 100%.
You're right, they are just performing hateful acts towards trans people, they may be doing it out of laziness or ignorance rather than actually hating trans people. As we all know, materially helping an anti trans cause doesn't mean you hate trans people in the same way materially helping terrorists doesn't make you a terrorist. Ex: our friends and allies in Saudi Arabia.
Voting isn't a hateful act. Any insinuation of that needs to stop.
Voting can absolutely be a hateful act, I literally can't imagine what happens in your brain that makes you think otherwise. The entire US 2024 election was hate vs not-the-hate-guy. A vengeance fantasy for middle aged white men.
No, if you think that, your brain is twisted by whatever spin your preferred media choice puts on.
The 2024 election was more about people wanting to see change, and one candidate clearly offering it and the other clearly not. Look at Harris' polling timeline, she was doing well up until the beginning of October, so what happened? For example, she wouldn't change anything from Biden's first term, except having a Republican in the cabinet. Trump took that and ran with that, and I think that describes her support dropping around that time. People were unhappy with Biden's first term, and she wouldn't say anything bad about it. I didn't watch the 60 minutes interview, but I'm guessing that went similarly.
I think most thought Trump was mostly rhetoric except the couple things they cared about. I think most thought he was bluffing about tariffs (or thought they'd work differently), thought he'd actually bring prices down, etc, which explains his cratering support so far. The average voter is kinda dumb/naive, but I don't think they were largely voting on hate against immigrants, trans people, etc.
I dunno I've watched enough of the maga people talk to be pretty confident they just hate the world.
The "this guy will shake things up" argument would make sense if he hadn't already been our single most corrupt president in a generation (until 47)
You seem to be talking about influencers and whatnot. I'm talking about your average Joe in the middle that doesn't really follow politics but was mad at things getting more expensive over Biden's term. They aren't large in numbers, but they tend to determine elections.
Ah, yes, there are also the terminally dumb and uneducated. But those people are just weaponized votes. They don't appear to have their own thoughts or agency, just mindless drones following whatever their one podcast or one cable network or their one YouTube guy tells them to do.
But no, there's also plenty of videos of random magas in various formats, and a driving factor for those people appears to be hate (with a healthy mix of not understanding the concept of cause and effect)
The messaging was:
What do you expect the average person to take away from that?
Harris ran an awful campaign IMO, so it's not surprising that people opted for the alternative.
What do I expect them to think? "Trump was a shit president last time, why would I give him another shot"
To the average voter who doesn't follow things very closely, the options were basically:
Unfortunately, far too many people blame the economy on the sitting President, when they often have little influence on it. Trump was president during an economic boom, and got out just as COVID was going. Biden was president through COVID, and by all accounts was incapable of the job during at least part of his term. What do you expect the average person to do who doesn't follow politics closely but catches bits and pieces closer to the election? Of course they'll go with the person promising change over the person promising the status quo...
Ok maga, I give up talking to you
Maga? Really? I was very vocal about voting against him in all three elections.
I'm not saying Trump was the better candidate. I'm merely saying Harris ran a poor, tone-deaf campaign.
If you read the rest you'll discover that the reactionaries don't care how you vote, they'll call you that regardless.
I'm taking from the downvotes that there are a lot of people here who got caught up on those first few words and didn't bother reading the rest or engaging their critical thinking skills...
You had me until this. The term is already meaningless because of the overuse from the left-wingers. No one right of the far-left cares about being called any of the "phobics" or "ists" anymore because they mean nothing now.
Ok at least you finished on the right note.
Somebody ACTUALLY on the left wouldn't use what energy they have trying to shatter any hope of an anti-fascist coalition we have by poo-flinging. Thus, someone who does that must be on the right. Right?