Diseases did not conquer hundreds of tribes.

Disease played a major role in the European's ability to conquer those tribes. It's not an either/or situation. It is true that the "Americas" that the English started colonizing had already been devastated by the contagions brought by the Spanish. The English undoubtedly would have found it far more difficult and maybe even impossible to conquer those hundreds of tribes had they not first been so severely depopulated by pandemic. Acknowledging this does not absolve or even lessen the atrocities committed by the English.

As a disabled trans person I find this comparison rather disgusting:

There is also an ongoing trans genocide no one talks about enough, it’s easier to ignore, and genocide of disabled people, both happening within our local communities.

The systemic oppression we face is real, horrible, and is an incalculable injustice that needs to be fought at all costs. But it is categorically not the same as the wholesale literal slaughter of tens of thousands of Palestinian children. Don't tell me you can look at the images coming out of Gaza of countless mangled bodies in the bombed-out rubble of their homes and hospitals and say "yeah, but I'm being genocided like that too." This is a category error and I find it more than "kind of gross."

What's more is that it doesn't matter which injustice is "worse." Giving one attention does not mean we should be silent on the other. That's not how the fight against injustice works. It's competition-brained bullshit at best. Everyone here agrees with the fact that transphobia is a deep social evil that we all have to struggle against, but using it as leverage to say we should talk less about the downplaying and denial of the genocide in Gaza, that is reprehensible. Both of these injustices can be (and often are) talked about and struggled against simultaneously without detracting from the other. By calling out Wynn's scummy liberal, bordering on genocide-denying rhetoric, and expressing our disgust with a person who would use their large platform to spew that rhetoric, we are not in any way detracting from the fight against transphobia or ableism. On the other hand, when someone comes along and says we shouldn't be loudly calling out that kind of behavior, that really is a kind of detraction from that struggle.

I don’t agree with her politics and viscerally feel the innate violence of liberalism but also listen to her streams when I need to know I’m not alone in being trans, depressed and an addict.

If you have a parasocial attachment to a problematic personality and find them somehow comforting, fine. I'm sure many here can relate simply because we live in a world dominated by liberalism. But don't tell others they shouldn't be vocally critical of those things you yourself say you recognize are bad. Personally, I wouldn't want to keep listening to someone who uses aspects I share (trans, depressed, addiction) as they're pushing a liberal agenda, what you yourself described as the innate violence of liberalism. It's not a crime to have low standards, but to defend the indefensible or tell others to be quiet about it, that's going beyond just having a problematic fav.

Are there better people to tear down at the moment.

Don't do that. Don't do the "worse things exist so don't talk about this one bad thing that I say is lesser." Whether or not you realize you're doing it, that is an actual known tactic to throw a wrench in organizing efforts and derail leftist groups. It comes back to that same false binary I was talking about above. Yes there are and always will be "better people to tear down" that is, "worse people" like those in power who are the ones actively waging the genocide. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be rightly criticizing other ghouls and vultures engaging in genocide denialist rhetoric which is what Wynn is doing.

Reading the hate towards her feels kind of gross, like a real easy scapegoat for anger n frustration at liberals

She is not a scapegoat. She is a millionaire with a substantial following and platform she is using to push fascist-adjacent talking points. This shit needs to be loudly criticized and called what it is. If she doesn't want that criticism, she can just not say that shit. She is not a leftist, she is a liberal Clintonesque centrist. She deserves every bit of ire she gets from the left, the same as any right wing pundit.

MSM switching from "the enemy is weak and ineffectual" mode to consent-manufacturing mode.

Behold, fellow lemmy browsers: here^ we see the scratched liberal as their mask starts to slip. Not unlike the "UHMUHRICA! Love it er LEAVE it!" style of chud. They have a similar simplistic and deeply uncurious faulty view of the world, a view desperately clung to even when they are shown it is undeniably false, for self reflection is too frightening a concept for them even to consider.

Many of them lived through the entire Nuclear age.

That's just it though, considering that they are the leaders of a giant death cult, many of them probably feel like they got shortchanged when the USSR fell without any nuclear armageddon, not even a little bit. This could be Biden's last chance for the Christmas he always really wanted.

Making this comment because I'm seeing some of these issues crop up in the comments, and in comments from different instances that can't see each other, so rather than reply individually, I'll just make a separate standalone comment.

It bugs me a little whenever people talk about how old a species is. There are different levels to how wrong it is possible to be about this. The worst level is where people think that it's the individuals that are somehow ancient. No. The individuals from those times are as long gone as all the other individuals from that time. Most people don't think that, but it happens. Another level is a bit less wrong, but still is. That the species itself is ancient because it somehow avoided evolution. Nah, it's just retained a lot of characteristics. Theses species still underwent evolution, it's literally unavoidable. It's just that the way they adapted to an ancient environment still works as adaptation to the current (and intervening) environments. They haven't gone through as many drastic visible changes because the way their ancestors lived still works for their modern iterations.

So it is definitely fair to say a species is old, but it's important to realize that that doesn't mean it's literally old in that it hasn't evolved. If they are impressed by species that haven't gone through a lot of apparent changes over the eons, they should check out stromatolites.

I personally feel these are the end days of what’s left of the freedom internet.

I hope you're wrong. I guess that should go without saying. But I don't know, it seems like they've been trying to crack down and been consistently failing at it, which is hopeful. Like youtube's attempt to make adblockers not work anymore ending up just strengthening uBlock Origin and making it work even better than it did before. lol.

Obviously, google et al have all the power, but even so, they mostly keep losing battles, which is both hilarious and hopeful. I agree that we're seeing the further enshitification of all the big social media giants and they're corralling and enclosing the commons more all the time. But I haven't given up on all the little things that spring up to address that enshitification, like the frontends, like searx, and hell, even lemmy. You were 100% right, we need to evolve, but I would say these things are good mutations that are part of the process of that necessary evolution.

I don't know, I'm too high rn not to go off on tangents.

The only people I know of who don't know what the word "liberal" means, especially in the context the person above was using it, are very ignorant Americans. To be clear, even though I don't like most Americans, I'm not blaming them for being ignorant in this particular case because they have been subjected to decades of mostly uncontested propaganda deliberately obfuscating the term. But most of the rest of the world knows what everyone is talking about when saying "liberal" and knows it's a right wing ideology. And everyone shouldn't have to hold up the conversation to preemptively explain what the word means to those who don't already know. People are generally expected to pick up the gist of a sentence or point via the context of what's being said. The context was perfectly clear and it just sounds like concern trolling to go on about needing to hand-hold and dumb down the terminology being used for "the average person."

Lemmygrad isn't "hated" by most of the wider lemmyverse. There's just a loud and obnoxious minority of people that will rail and rant about lemmygrad. They loudly rant about lemmygrad because they aren't used to seeing their worldview get challenged and by its very nature as a radical leftist community, lemmygrad is a challenge to the typical background liberal perspective.

It's no surprise we all end up seeing a lot of threads about "those mean tankies at lemmygrad" (and hexbear too) made by people who can't take their worldview getting questioned, or even shown to be flawed, or just not standing up to their own scrutiny, and who get mad when that happens. There are also of course people with ideological reasons to demonize leftwing politics and will spread shit for that reason alone. But overall, I don't think most people care enough except to think "oh yeah that's that instance with those radical lefties, they're weird but they do make some great memes sometimes."

Waah, I'm too impatient for anything that might challenge my simple yet fragile good-guy/bad-guy worldview! 😭

It sucks because there can actually be good comments from people you ARE federated with, but you'll never see it if someone you're not federated with commented further up in that chain of the thread. [

I commented here on one of those c/ukraine posts talking about the inevitability of Russia about to lose. I checked in later with a hexbear account and realized no one here would see it because I was responding to a sh.itjust.works dumbass. From hexbear it shows "0 comments."

Anyway, to answer Doubledee, there can be LOTS of stuff you're not seeing and you would never know it. There are sometimes posts with over a thousand comments but if I'm logged in with hexbear, I will only see like 20, mostly because fucking lemmy.world has so many people. There are also times I won't see posts or comments with one instance but I can with another but I can't figure out why, because they're all federated with each other.

I'm guessing your autocorrect didn't like the word "defederated" and turned it into a word that's a slur if you don't include the 'd' at the end? lol

also I agree with your comment.

edit- Who wouldn't want to be called an outfox?