Forums / Discussion / General

JD Vance is being bankrolled by Peter Thiel, not Elon Musk. Whether you like it or not "Big Tech" has been involved in influencing the US election even prior to Trump. And it's clear that for a long while they favored Trump's opposition, and, for the most part, still do. Where I think they may become increasingly supportive of Trump is that he's a wild-card that can be relatively easy to manipulate (as we have seen during the debates). Ideologically I would venture to say that Silicon Valley aligns themselves closer to the cosmopolitan, globalist than they do with a more rural conservative. However, on a more practical business level the reality is that tech-industry relies on a steady flow of cheap capital – and relatively unhindered access to the masses. The Biden administration – whether purposefully or not – has made it difficult on both those fronts.

I don't mind it at all that "private interest groups" dictate public policy. In fact. I'd prefer it. Because instead of using "private interest groups" to mean "big business" I understand that the private interest groups are a hodge podge of various interest groups representing the interests of a multitude of people, often times, at odds with one another. The interest groups I would find most abhorrent are public ones, because their sole goal is to expand the bureaucracy, entrench themselves into the system, and create a modern, artificial, aristocracy.

JD Vance is being bankrolled by Peter Thiel, not Elon Musk.

It's both unfortunately, and not only them.

Although I defer to you on why that's the case. I believe the cause is more ideological (the problem when people have too much money and influence), but it's possible they just think they'll make more money with Trump.

I don't mind it at all that "private interest groups" dictate public policy. Because instead of using "private interest groups" to mean "big business" I understand that the private interest groups are a hodge podge of various interest groups representing the interests of a multitude of people, often times, at odds with one another.

If only that were so, but I think you're operating more on hopes and what it should be like, rather than what it actually is. Can I at least say that it proves the section on Project 2025 about Big Tech was intended?

because their sole goal is to expand the bureaucracy, entrench themselves into the system, and create a modern, artificial, aristocracy.

Instead of a Corporatocracy? Because that seems to be the new feudalism, I could say the same in reverse for the techno-authoritarians. If it's anything like Russia & Gazprom, they tend to work together to gut regulations and install themselves as a new artificial aristocracy.

Personally, I prefer public to private, one actually gets elected.

I would also rather not lose the context that big tech has indirectly decided to threaten national security of multiple countries for their own reasons. The seriousness of that has likely not escaped the notice of policymakers.

Honestly the 1% already are the new aristorcracy and have been since the 80s

We should had listen more to the boomers about the internet

It is so.
The more I look into it and the more I learn about how power functions in democracies, the more I am convinced that the problem isn't entirely the lobbying. To me the bigger issues our legislative branch's connection to WallStreet vis-a-vie stock ownership. Frankly, it's not enough for me to know how our legislators invest in the market. They should be absolutely barred from doing do so.

There is a reason why both the GOP and the Democrats have done very little to curb the monopolizing power of big-Tech. Big Tech dominates. Absolutely dominates our stock market, and they are heavily invested into it. To put it into perspective, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta Platforms, and Tesla. Combined, they make up 28.8% of the market index.

Lobbying is effectively a myriad of interest groups representing issues that are important to groups of people. For example, there are small-business groups that lobby local and federal elections for better tax breaks, or a Union that is pushing for better working conditions. Or an environmental group that is trying to create legislation that may protect certain parks. All of these groups have competing interests and look for like minded political actors to give their supporot to.

Ultimately, every politician's goal is to get votes, to do that they need a campaign, and that campaign needs financing. Lobbying groups have an interest in getting politicians they like to win, and give them their support in hopes that the politician is going to win and implement their policies. I don't think something like Big Oil is going to go to someone like AOC and promise to fund her next campaign if she doesn't go for them. Frankly, they would rather invest their money in already like-minded individual – probably a Democrat or Republican in a state where oil is a large industry.

I don't like to use the term "feudalism" as there is no set definition of it and it's often used a pejorative to describe a deeply rigid and hierarchal society with little class and economic mobility. I don't know if comparing Corporatocracy to feudalism is useful, because I don't know how you want to describe feudalism here.

Bureaucrats don't get elected. They are a managerial class who's sole purpose is to expand themselves and make themselves useful. They aren't elected in, but either get permanent government jobs or appointed.

The seriousness of big-tech becoming a security issue has not gone unnoticed, hence why they are going after TicToc….by hoping to dissolve it and distribute it to the big 5. Again, there is a vested interest in political class to make sure that there are monopolies because they are easier to manage, and more profitable.

Less Keys to Power to deal with.

I refuse to believe that you are so ignorant to be both unaware of these and to think that this is somehow not meeting the definition of being "a threat to democracy".

The point of contention was never whether or not it's true, but whether or not its constant use as an attack slogan was a major factor in triggering two assassination attempts in two months. To which I'd say, most certainly; not everyone reacts to being told "your way of life might totally end for real!!!" ad nauseam by simply planning to vote harder, and not everyone who takes it further is satisfied by simply calling for death on the Internet.

At least Hillary's use of the word in context was ultimately trying to bridge divisions between parties

Slandering "half" of your opponent's supporters is a very ass-backwards way of "bridging divisions". That said, I don't see how Hillary Clinton using the word in an ill-conceived statement precludes the Trump campaign from using it eight years later.

Trump has encouraged people to vote twice

In a tongue-in-cheek manner to suggest that the vote-by-mail system isn't robust ("And if the system is as good as they say it is, then obviously they won't be able to vote [in person]"). He's a New York businessman, not a Chicago one.

suggested he would disregard term limits

Not necessarily antidemocratic in of itself; it depends on how he would deal with the 22nd Amendment. FDR and Merkel were both elected four times, though given those examples, I think it's fair to say there's diminishing returns the more times a politician is elected.

I elected (heh) to ignore your other claims, because they're either uncited or use fucking Wikipedia.

Yes, I am concerned Trump has a pattern of making decisions that make it difficult for his Secret Service to protect him from assassination attempts.

So, shifting the blame. At least you're considerably more concerned than most other users here, which is worth something.

I really love how leftists pretend to oppose the rich elites, but they only attack easy and acceptable targets like Musk, Trump and Thiel.
Those rich elites who are on their side are fine.

Can’t imagine why leftists would hate racist and lgbtphobic billionaires the most
and doubt it
only tankies defend billionaires

I forgot to ask before, but back to my previous comment, are you equally concerned about the rumors being spread by a certain party about Haitian immigrants in Springfield?

#BREAKING

UN General Assembly ADOPTS resolution demanding that Israel “brings to an end without delay its unlawful presence” in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and do so within 12 months

https://x.com/UN_News_Centre/status/1836426106896785428

Spaghetto wrote:

I don't see how Hillary Clinton using the word in an ill-conceived statement precludes the Trump campaign from using it eight years later.

Trump supporters adopted the term “deplorables” including Trump Jr. himself.

I was pointing out that the Trump campaign now trying to use the word unironically after it was co-opted as a near badge of honor is kinda funny.

Spaghetto wrote:

I elected (heh) to ignore your other claims, because they're either uncited or use fucking Wikipedia.

Smugly parading around that you are more ignorant than I gave you credit for serves to question if I was right to speak up in your favor when others had suggested you should be banned and no other purpose.

The “uncited ones” dominated the news cycle for months. I cited Wikipedia to refresh the memories of any users who might have forgotten that the event occurred, either having been too young to clearly remember or not living in the US. Your rebuttal of this is the equivalent of counter-signal meme and is rich when you’re only citation is the Trump Campain’s own website and “To which I'd say”

“he would only accept the results of the 2020 election if he won”

He repeatedly refused to say he would accept the results.

“insisting that he won after it was clear he didn't”

“asserting that he only lost because of voter fraud”

“asking Georgia secretary of State to find him more votes:”

“People in power supporting him tried to get electors who would vote for Trump contrary to the actual votes.”

But none of this matters, right?
No matter the citations, how many clear examples of him or his supporters being directly quoted on what they said, it will never be enough.

Even with the statement of ‘be mad at the past 20+ years of politics that have made statements like "threat to democracy" so overused that when someone openly shows contempt for it, it rings hollow.’ It's those that are pointing out those statements and actions as being antagonistic to democracy and proposed and enacted policies that make people's lives harder that are the problem. It's never the anti-democratic positions or the policies themselves that are at fault, right? It doesn't matter that Trump himself is personally responsible for rhetoric far exceeding that which his campaign is now complaining about. Those that have been threatened in Springfield Ohio, those who certified the election for Biden, a plethora of others incidents claiming Trump as some justification. None of those incidents matter because lone gunmen took advantage of Trump's idiotic moves to be in places that were easy to exploit despite the advice of the Secret Service. The direct line from Trump's words to actions is extremely unimportant compared to the rhetoric of the mainstream media which neither attempted assassin seemed to watch closely or endorse. That is the real villain of this story here.

Smugly parading around that you are more ignorant than I gave you credit for

I'm not ignorant, I just wanted to only address the claims you actually cited – surely if they were important to your argument, you would've cited them as well, correct? Just because something "dominated the news cycle for months" several years ago doesn't mean you can pen them down as "it is known" – except for maybe the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks, since those have never left public consciousness. And even then, many people born a long time after may not be very aware…

More to the point of order, I tell you what, I will comment on the other claims. Just tomorrow, it's well past midnight here. Furthermore I'll likely keep it brief, as I'm not interested in arguing with moderators for too long; I simply don't trust the power disparity.

Absolutely SHOCKING!
The UN can't even enforce Resolution 1701 which would have prevented Hezbollah from even being a threat, but somehow, we think it's going to facilitate the ethnic cleansing of more than half a million of Jews, including from East Jerusalem?

Lol.

LMAO even.

@Chewybunny

It is so.

I did not contest that the system exists, what I was contesting was the optimistic description you had of it, when I think it means big business dominates policy to an unacceptable degree. By your own explanation, the system seems ripe for abuse, instead of complementing the democratic exercise, it may supplant it. I prefer public process to private interest groups.

This is why techno-authoritarians are dangerous, they already have their ideology of 'doing away with the fiction' of giving power to 'high-status people'. It's using the language of democracies ("liberty" and "freedom"), to put it at an end.

Thank you for your explanation, it's a very sobering look at the presence of private interest groups and big tech in our economy and society. However, based on it, I'm sorry to say my position is still that there this trend must be countered (although it's permeated the political process of many countries to the degree that one doesn't know where to start).

I don't like to use the term "feudalism" as there is no set definition of it and it's often used a pejorative to describe a deeply rigid and hierarchal society with little class and economic mobility. I don't know if comparing Corporatocracy to feudalism is useful, because I don't know how you want to describe feudalism here.

You did use aristocracy first, I don't think comparing republics to an aristocracy is useful either, we'll need definitions for a lot of things here. Personally, my term of choice is oligarchy, although the lack of class and economic mobility may be not that far off with some of the policies and economic realities occurring.

Each corporations in such a future (or in the present day in some areas) acts as a fiefdom of it's own, with very little powers regulating how they treat the societies influenced or even subject to them. Subject to only very loose allegiances to their host-nation (or outright working with them to exploit the serfs). That's how I'd describe the feared future (or present).

The Corporatism of Project 2025 was less mentioned for obvious reasons, but it still exists.

Bureaucrats don't get elected. They are a managerial class who's sole purpose is to expand themselves and make themselves useful. They aren't elected in, but either get permanent government jobs or appointed.

The politicians who appoint them do, or for some it's just a career with the ensuing meritocracy. I personally find the tendency to blame bureaucrats for autocracy to be very wrong-headed when wannabe tinpot dictators want to purge them first as a check on their power.

If one wants to continue the medieval metaphor, it's the King & Grand Dukes wanting to purge the lower nobility, when those are the ones in contact with the people and who actually do the work (and even act as checks against royal recklessness). This talking point is very much in-line with the nascent ideology of the techno-authoritarians.

“Our enemy,” Andreessen writes, is “the know-it-all credentialed expert worldview, indulging in abstract theories, luxury beliefs, social engineering, disconnected from the real world, delusional, unelected, and unaccountable--playing God with everyone else’s lives, with total insulation from the consequences.”

The irony is that this description very closely fits Andreessen and other Silicon Valley elites. The world that they have brought into being over the past two decades is unquestionably a world of reckless social engineering, without consequence for its architects, who foist their own abstract theories and luxury beliefs on all of us.

To quote from one of the articles I posted. Personally, I had enough of these huckster types after Brexit.

The seriousness of big-tech becoming a security issue has not gone unnoticed, hence why they are going after TicToc….by hoping to dissolve it and distribute it to the big 5. Again, there is a vested interest in political class to make sure that there are monopolies because they are easier to manage, and more profitable. Less Keys to Power to deal with.

I don't agree with the US's approach here, I prefer Brazil and Australia's approach. Although, that may be my statist tendencies.

It's a throwaway comment, but I actually had a few things I wanted to say about it:

1) That they are described as Right hurts more the American Right (or 'Alt-Right) more than anything else. There goes "draining the swamp", unless that has drifted from going after big business as do all empty slogans.

Don't make this left or right, it insults the right. One of my older family member's who I disagree with a lot actually aligned with me on these billionaires due to the fact that they stayed true to their values. A lot of what the American Right consider normal (including rubbing elbows with theocratic and neo-nazi groups (and with what happened with the Haitians in Springfield among other events, I can very well say that)) isn't actually.

Wouldn't even be normal for what the American Right was a few decades ago.

2) Name one of those rich elites. We'll learn more on how I respond and who you pick.

I've noticed that with a lot of Russian nationalists and some of the American Right that when they have nothing they rely on presumed hypocrisy of the opposite side (or use to excuse themselves). When I criticized someone of the American Right for their support of violent riots, they assumed that must mean I support violence on the left. I don't.

and they should have kept the promise to themselves as well because some have got so delusional

Ethbic cleansing is indeed bad, that’s why Israel’s government is evil

We must abolish Japanese laws related to copyright

It's exactly what the resolution calls for.
What do you think they meant "evacuating all settlers from the Occupied
Palestinian Territory" ? That's a demand to forcefully remove 500,000 Jews in the West Bank, and 220,000 Jews living in East Jerusalem. That's an ethnic cleansing.

i love how so many people conveniently forget that forcefully ejecting an entire people from a country is considered genocide.

oh but they never forget that fact when it comes to palestinians, they only forget it when it comes to israel. convenient.

Yeah I didn't put much thought into that comment and wrote it quickly.
I don't think many of those people are genuine in their beliefs, the right is just desperate to have someone rich on their side so they will accept anyone like them.
Why do you think Elon Musk has decided to virtue signal to the right now? Other billinaires either pay lip service to the modern left or they keep a low profile.
To be clear I don't like Musk at all, I just think it's interesting how the public reception on him changed so quickly.
What do you consider billionaires true values? Greed and ruthlessness? It's clear none of those people got rich through hard and honest work.
I just thought it's funny how Thiel has suddenly turned into this big bad boogeyman like Soros for the right.

Well you have people like Bill Gates and his foundation with their insane out of touch ideas for example.
I do not support violence either but it seems more people will be losing faith in the system and going for this kind of action.

Also, have you heard about the elite theory? I think that some form of elite class in society is always inevitable.

saying he would only accept the results of the 2020 election if he won, insisting that he won after it was clear he didn't, asserting that he only lost because of voter fraud

And that's bad; certainly more anti-democratic than what you had actually cited previously. Now let's see what Hillary Clinton has to say about the 2016 election and what she wanted Biden to do if he lost in 2020. So the loser of an election repeatedly claims it was illegitimate and then demand her successor only accept the results of the 2020 election of he wins…

Making undemocratic statements or demands in the face of defeat isn't uniquely a Trump thing, or even an American thing. It's a symptom of an unstable status quo.

asking Georgia secretary of State to find him more votes.

How about we bring the whole transcript instead of just talking about one sentence removed from all context?

This doesn't make it much better, but it's clear that Trump is demanding Georgia do another, much more thorough audit, in spite of protests from Raffensperger and others that the audit they already did was sufficient, saying prior to the highlighted sentence that "[if you check for illegitimate ballots] you will be at 11,779 within minutes", adding ambiguity to whether he meant "find 11,780 votes for me" or "find 11,780 illegitimate votes for Biden". The former is much more damning, which is why everyone ran with it, but the latter is merely shady.

People in power supporting him tried to get electors who wouldvote for Trump contrary to the actual votes.

As for this, I'll need to look more into the laws that govern electors, but in the interim, did you know that there was a minor plot in 2016 to try and convince electors to vote against Trump contrary to the actual votes? It was, at least, not publicly supported by the Clinton campaign, but the end goal was very much the same.

Edit: I think the point got a bit lost along the way, so…

It doesn't matter that Trump himself is personally responsible for rhetoric far exceeding that which his campaign is now complaining about.

Matter for what? The assassination attempts?

All copywright lawd need to be changed so that only people, not corporations can have copyright and it expires 5 years after their death

>Also, have you heard about the elite theory? I think that some form of elite class in society is always inevitable.

I agree that there always will be to an extent, but we should do what we can to make it less of a gap, make it based on what good they do, and make it as large of a percentage as possible

‘Miss Sassy’ Is Safe: JD Vance’s Pet-Eating Hoax Hits Another Embarrassing Snag

So it turns out the reported missing cat that caused the rumor about Haitian immigrants eating pets turned out to be in the owner's basement. All this and what did we get out of it for these past weeks on the Haitian immigrants in Springfield?

At the very least I'm glad the cat is safe.

@Gilan
I think there is some clarification needed.
"By your own explanation, the system seems ripe for abuse, instead of complementing the democratic exercise, it may supplant it. I prefer public process to private interest groups."

Any system is ripe for abuse. Our system makes it so democracy, specifically, the popular vote, doesn't have as much power. I think that's a good thing. People are stupid, and most people don't really care about issues outside of how it personally affects them. It's why we have a Representative Democracy, in that we delegate our individual political power to a Representative that is supposed to represent us – the idea being that the Representative would represent the interests of a large segment of people. I think that makes more sense to me. Lobbying is a private form of representation which I think is necessary to the idea of free association.

Can you clarify what you mean by techno-authoritarians? That sounds to me like technocracy which far more left-leaning people support.

"You did use aristocracy first, I don't think comparing republics to an aristocracy is useful either, we'll need definitions for a lot of things here."

There has absolutely been Republics with an aristocracy. The Republic of Venice was ruled by an oligarchy of about 20-30 aristocratic families, for example. Aristocrats are different than nobles. Noble refers to a person that has a high rank by birth and is often hereditary, where as an aristocrat emphasizes status or class derived from wealth, lifestyle, or influence.

Public groups in the US, at least, seek to entrench their people into positions of power that is impossible to remove them from. For example, in most states people that work in the public sector may not get paid as well as private sector, but they have unbelievable privileges, and protections. If you become a bureaucrat in the US system, you're set for life, you will never fear being fired even if you suck at your job. It's why I am a big supporter of Unions for the private sector but extremely against Unions for the Public sector because the Public Sector never has to contend with a dynamic market. And these bureaucrats – which the Democrats constantly seek to expand – have massive influence over how the entire system operates.

"I personally find the tendency to blame bureaucrats for autocracy to be very wrong-headed when wannabe tinpot dictators want to purge them first as a check on their power."

Bureaucrats in the US will not get purged. It would require the political will that neither Trump or Harris can wield. It would require the political will to not just purge them, but somehow overcome the lawyer army that would line up to defend them, and the shut down of our entire government system in the process. This would, undoubtedly, make any such political will dissipate rapidly. For a purge like this to happen, in our system, would require decades of single party rule. That's just not something our system allows for, no matter how much the MAGA crowd or Trump wants it.

Elon Musk, as a tech-billionaire doesn't have any control over my life. I don't drive a Tesla, and I do not use twitter anymore. But the teacher's union has an affect on my life. The protected bureaucrats working at the local Department of Motor Vehicles absolutely do. So does the Department of Labor, the Department of Social Security services.  I don't have to buy a Tesla, I don't have to buy through Amazon, I don't have to use an Apple Phone. I do, however, have to pay a yearly $250 dollar registration fee to the DMV just so I can drive my car, and it was only this year, in the year of our lord 2024, that the California DMV allows you to order a replacement ID online – before I had to sit 6 hours at my local DMV just to get piece of plastic that has my identifications on it. When I went to school we knew damn well who the bad teachers are (and I bet every single on of us had them), and yet not one of them could be fired. In fact, they had tenure, which means that whenever there was a need to cut down on the amount of teachers the young, the enthusiastic, the ones with the most energy are the first to be cut. The old, the tired, the near-retirement ones that are just countin the last remaining years that they have to deal with teaching a bunch of ungrateful brats are the ones that get to stay. I saw it first hand how this bureaucracy worked all my life, and I – like most Americans find it mind-numbing. Our public healthcare, our public universities, all those costs that everyone in America complains about can be attributed to administrative (beuracratic) bloat. According to the Harvard Business Review. the cost of excess bureaucracy in the U.S. economy amounts to more than $3 trillion in lost economic output, or about 17% of GDP.

Which is why I am very drawn to the E-Stonia model of public governance, which has digitalized so much of it's public sector that they actually have a relatively small bureaucracy.

Funny you mention the Republic of Venice because the Founding Fathers admired their idea of using checks and balance, but they hated the presence of the aristocratic element. Especially since it was the hereditary type of aristocracy.They had inspirations from it, but they wanted to make it more democratic than an oligarchical, so it's how they got the idea of seperation of powers in the government (executive, legislative and judicial).

When it comes to private vs public, the problem is that the private is ultimately motivated by profit. Not only that but nowadays it means more influence from the techno authoritarian billionaires. I'm seeing a sort of trend of Peter Thiel types that have a distain for democracies and yet praise a future similar to Russian's oligarchy. So forgive me if I don't trust the private sector in protecting us from a dystopia, because I'm seeing a lot of the private sector being hijacked by these shady characters.

it is actually impressive that there's someone more embarrassing with Trump's stamp of approval than Loomer and Vance, but… well… here we are.

Black nazi pro-slave coomer

ok I drastically changed my mind, while it wasnt really needed in the past the mods will probably need to start doing FAR more…. clean-up in the approaching times.

When it comes to private vs public, the problem is that the private is ultimately motivated by profit.

"Public" interests nowadays focus very strongly on generating infinite upward growth. Switching to "private interests" would be a lateral change by now.

Which is why I am very drawn to the E-Stonia model of public governance, which has digitalized so much of it's public sector that they actually have a relatively small bureaucracy.

You can't digitize the bureaucracy without the ability to actually fire the bureaucrats you render obsolete. While I don't think there's any way of curtailing our gargantuan bureaucracy that's both clean and fast, I have to wonder how hard and slow it would be to undermine the protections that make bureaucrats virtually unaccountable. Surely that would be step one?

Trump is once again pussing out of a debate

I'd give him a pass on that if he's fearful for his life after those two assassination attempts after a debate.

Fellas.
New deep lore dropped:

Trump: 'women shouldn't worry about abortions and smile more'
I think he's officially on strategy: steal instead of trying to actually win right now

"or even a tactical nuclear weapon" call me absolutely fucking crazy here, bu i don't think israel is willing to risk starting world war 3 just to get rid of some dumbasses with ied pagers

The Toronto School District forced students from 7th and 8th grade to go to a political anti-Israel rally. Jewish students were told to wear blue to mark them as colonizers.

When the Jewish student voiced their uncomfort wearing the blue, the teacher responded with "You'll get over it".

Alberta: "we're the Florida of Canada"
Toronto: "hold my poutine"

minor funny/sad note. You know how the mypillow guy completely lost his head? well currently there's a promo code for the product for the low low price of $14.88. For those of you not aware of neo-nazis… it's the "fourteen words heil hitler"
https://x.com/MyPillowUSA/status/1837171459019489401/photo/1

Disgusting
first of all it's racist
second of all children should not be going to political rallies for any reasons

Sometimes it's just a coincidence, this time it's obviously not

Fake news

They were not told to wear blue to mark them as colonizers, or ever to identify as settler or colonizer

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/students-as-young-as-eight-compelled-to-attend-political-protest-field-trip

Same publication retracted this in the next article by showing the actual email and with no more mentions of the allegations, only two articles ever state this (one by the toronto sun and the Jerusalem post) and both publications only "alleged" this allegation.

Well that's good news, at least they weren't forced to wear blue to be identified as colonizer.
However, let me ask you this, do you think it's appropriate for schools to force students in 3rd to 6th grade to participate in what became an anti-Israel rally? Especially when the original goal was to be "seeking justice for the northern Ontario First Nation dealing with a decades-old water contamination crisis." ?

In unsuprising news trump wants to shut down the department of education,m because he wants non 1% children back in factories

Wait did children of non 1% all work in factories prior to 1979?

Before you try to gotcha me look at all the reactionary run states bringing back child labour

Sure, but that seems to be an issue with the Department of Labor, not the department of education.

Nope, it's an issue of the reactionaries pushing to end all public services

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/23/israel-benjamin-netanyahu-plan-northern-gaza-palestinian-civilians-hamas?CMP=twt_gu#Echobox=1727135530

"Benjamin Netanyahu considering mass clearance of northern Gaza

Plan calls for Palestinian civilians to be forced out and Hamas militants put under siege in ‘closed military zone’"

mass clearance being a euphemism for ethnic cleansing