AcidicBasicGlitch

joined 4 weeks ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Literally every reference is cited in the post as always, but just to offer the transparency these people claim to love but always avoid:

Office of Homeland Security is making cuts to Civil Rights Offices within the agency for getting in the way on immigration issues. Except the 3 offices being cut are the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (OCRL), the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman, and the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman.

The OCRL is in charge of all civil rights under Dept. homeland security, not just immigrants. If an American citizen gets detained by homeland security, this is the office that makes sure your rights don't get violated while in custody and if they do, this is the office you have to go through for FOIA request to document you were even in custody. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/workforce/2025/03/homeland-security-makes-cuts-to-offices-overseeing-civil-rights-protections/

However, even with that cut, there is still a civil rights division within the FEMA Office https://www.dhs.gov/office-civil-rights-and-civil-liberties

https://www.fema.gov/about/offices/civil-rights

On the same day the Florida Reps proposed bill was announced to "liberate FEMA", the secretary of DHS also announced during a live broadcast that DHS was getting rid of FEMA.

https://federalnewsnetwork.com/congress/2025/03/lawmakers-introduce-bill-to-break-fema-out-of-dhs/?readmore=1

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5213057-noem-plans-eliminate-fema/

Under the bill, FEMA would be led by a Senate-confirmed director who would answer to the president as a cabinet member instead of being an agency within the Dept. Of Homeland Security.

This would mean DHS makes cuts to it's main civil rights office and loses the fema branch that handles civil rights under national emergencies.

Meanwhile, DHS, DOD, and DOJ have all announced that they plan to start using polygraphs to smoke out employees leaking information to the press and plan to hand people over to legal authorities if the polygraph leads to finding out sensitive information was leaked, even though polygraphs are not admissible in court. You know, like a violation of due process.

https://apnews.com/article/leaks-pentagon-polygraph-trump-investigation-685b08e14d813050a722cec89eb5c323

Meanwhile, in the executive power loving state of Louisiana, the governor announced the day before the Pentagon announced they plan to violate due process rights that the state of Louisiana office of Homeland security and emergency planning would now be shifted to be completely controlled by the national guard.

If FEMA is no longer an agency, that means that they do not have the authority to go to a state to aid in anyway without the president's say so. That means that in Louisiana if there is a national disaster like oh idk a fucking hurricane, there is no longer a federal agency making sure the state national guard doesn't violate civil rights.

If you've ever had the privilege of feeling uneasy seeing tanks rolling down your street and armed guardsmen standing in front of grocery stores during a time when you knew you still had a civil rights office to enforce your rights, then you hopefully understand why this is fucking scary to imagine martial law without any branch of government able protect your civil rights

https://www.nola.com/news/politics/jeff-landry-restructure-gohsep-under-louisiana-national-guard-fiscal-responsibility/article_7e9e08f2-ee67-463c-a2b3-424f6165a087.html

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

According to the AP it's a direct quote from the memo written by the finest legal minds Trump's money can buy

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago

Damn, I've been so distracted with the everything else I didn't even think of that, but yeah sounds about right.

Little fucking fascists typing up their big scary memos to prove how much they love trampling on rights

[–] [email protected] 57 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Also haven't heard anyone mentioning this, but late on the Friday before this story was published, Hegseth's chief of staff sent a late night memo threatening anyone that leaks classified information to the press by saying they're going to start doing polygraph tests at DOD, and said

“If this effort results in information identifying a party responsible for an unauthorized disclosure,” then such information “will be referred to the appropriate criminal entity for criminal prosecution,”

So threatening to turn Department of Defense employees over to the authorities for leaking classified information to reporters if they fail a polygraph (which isn't even admissible in court bc they give false positives so often).

Then it turns out, oops the guy trying to intimidate everyone texted classified information to a reporter in a group chat and now it's a story in the Atlantic

https://apnews.com/article/leaks-pentagon-polygraph-trump-investigation-685b08e14d813050a722cec89eb5c323

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Not sure why the link is showing as an error message, but it seems to be working fine. Here it is again just in case: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-one-lifespan/202502/countering-authoritarian-behavior-in-democracies

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

I actually just started part 1 today and haven't made it to part 2 yet, but it is definitely worth listening to. (The entire podcast is worth checking out actually. The J.D. Vance episode especially).

I knew Musk didn't have the best childhood, but after listening to this, I honestly cannot help feeling empathy for his childhood self.

To clarify, that is in no way an excuse for anything he's done as an adult. It's an explanation for why he's the way he is, not excuse. When you have cPTSD, you get this weird ability to recognize the effects of trauma in other people.

Experiencing trauma is in no way the fault of the victim, but the cycle of violence and trauma will repeat over and over through generations until someone decides it will end with them, and seeks help. Elon Musk instead recently bragged that his tombstone will read "Never went to therapy."

There is no way Elon Musk could have survived the childhood he did without developing cPTSD. It's also clear from the statements of his former partners and himself about having a high tolerance for pain and chaos. Those aren't quirky Elon traits. Those are signs of trauma related dissociation that emerge as coping skills following repeated traumatic experiences.

I don't say that to mock him for his trauma. I say that because those are also traits I recognize in myself and others with cPTSD. It's a sign you survived something you shouldn't have had to go through, and while it may help you thrive in chaos, it's not fair to put others through trauma because it feels comfortable and familiar to you. Repeatedly seeking out chaos and finding ways to reenact your trauma either consciously or subconsciously, is again, not a quirky Elon specific trait. It is a shared trait of many trauma survivors, and one of easiest ways the cycle of abuse gets passed on to others, especially from someone in a position of power.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

Imagine waking up each morning, wondering if today’s the day you’ll be denounced by a neighbor, hauled off for “re-education,” or simply vanish without a trace. It’s a paralyzing anxiety that gnaws at the soul, leaving its victims desperate for any sense of security. And it’s in this desperation that the totalitarian regime finds its foothold.

The psychological terror inflicted by these systems is both a means and an end. It keeps the population docile and compliant, but it also serves a deeper purpose. In a world of constant threat, people crave certainty like a drowning man gasps for air. And who better to provide that certainty than the all-knowing, all-powerful state?

Totalitarian regimes offer a seductive promise: surrender your freedom, your individuality, your very thoughts to us, and we’ll keep you safe. We’ll tell you what to think, how to act, who to love and who to hate. No more difficult decisions, no more moral quandaries. Just blissful, mindless obedience.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

Eventually, people internalize external repression. This becomes internalized oppression. Internalized oppression is when marginalized individuals or groups take on the view of the oppressor, or in this case, the regime, and their behavior leads to further oppression (Prilleltensky & Gonick, 1996). Internalized oppression is how a dictatorship maintains its power most effectively. The subjugation of one group over another is associated with mass trauma (Heberle, Obus, & Gray, 2020).

Internalized oppression is when individuals come to believe their own inferiority and inability to bring about change in a system. Once an individual or a collective internalizes oppression, they come to believe the message an oppressor has been predicating. For example, in the Dominican Republic's dictatorship, individuals were urged to obey idiosyncratic rules such as carrying a voting card for fixed elections, paving the roads as community service, and doing military exercises regardless of age. Defying any of these laws resulted in consequences such as jail time and other harsh or lethal punishments. Individuals who internalized the oppression not only accepted and obeyed these rules but also encouraged others to do the same. In doing so, they supported the dictator even if they did not necessarily agree with his tyranny.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I've been looking for a place to discuss political psychology for a long time.

It's a topic I've been interested in since taking a special topics course in high school that covered crimes against humanity. One of my favorite teachers taught the course, and even though it's been almost 2 decades since I took his class, as an adult, I've realized that he taught more than just historical facts and dates.He taught us how to think critically, how to spot disinformation, and how to recognize the same tactics that have been used throughout history to exert control over narratives and large populations of people.

Sadly, it's become quite a useful skill to have. It's not an intuitive skill for most people, and certainly not one I would have had if it hadn't been for him. It's usually a skill you only learn through either education or the experience of living through it. I consider myself lucky to be in the former category, but the older I get the more I find myself recognizing things that let me know society is not headed in a promising direction.

So, I hope I can share some interesting topics and maybe help more people recognize the patterns of human behavior that seem to loop endlessly throughout history.

I think it might be best to start on a note that examines the shared psychological scar that typically follows surviving repeated trauma in both survivors of authoritarian regimes and domestic abuse. For that, there's no better place to start than the work of Judith Herman.

The main post is a link to a PDF of Herman's 1992 work distinguishing between PTSD following a single traumatic event and complex PTSD following exposure to repeated traumatic events.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

I do have face unlock option but it's showing in settings it's never been set up. No app permissions I wasn't aware of except android system intelligence. I tried to switch it to always ask permission but it just disappeared

 

Does a community exist to help people learn to spot more sophisticated bot activity and algorithm control on social media platforms. I was thinking of something where people could share screen shots of weird activity to warn others, similar to teaching people how to spot disinformation propaganda? Or a place where information is available focused on discussing bot activity.

I feel like that will be a useful skill to have in the coming years.

 

The NIH has been accused of funding dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Legislation is being proposed to ban federal funding for this research, which many powerful individuals have alleged is what led to the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, many scientists have pointed out that the vague language of the legislation would result in a blanket ban of federal funding for any virology or vaccine research in the U.S. This would mean that vaccine production and roll out would become completely privatized, even in the event of a pandemic.

This post examines the current policy behind federal funding for GOF research, which is based on framework created nearly a year into Donald Trump's first term.

The framework was created in response to policy recommendations provided by the Obama administration for oversight and care of pathogens with pandemic potential (P3CO). However, while P3CO provided recommendations for oversight and public transparency, these recommendations seem to have been omitted from the Trump framework for federal funding.

Justification for the removal of federal funding frequently sites a lack of oversight and transparency by the NIH. However, there is never any explanation given for why the Trump framework failed to include the recommendations to enable oversight and transparency for funding decisions.

Two days after taking office for his second term, Trump proposed an executive order banning GOF research, and received public praise from the Heritage Foundation.

This post which is focused on the policy background, will be followed by additional posts examining the proposed legislation and vaccine privatization.

 

Hello,

I am a researcher in the U.S. who began writing about the NIH federal funding issues just to keep people informed about things that weren't reaching most major news outlets.

I began this piece several weeks ago, and finally finished it this past week. The focus is on the attacks against the NIH for their gain-of-function research funding policy. I ended up doing a deep dive into the history of the policy which began in 2014, and trying to condense everything into an article for a broad audience.

You may have seen all of the proposed legislation about gain-of-function (GOF) research, and more recently increasing attacks on mRNA vaccines. It is being presented by legislative members as a concern over safety issues, however, it turns out there are many reasons to question if that is the legitimate reason these bills are being introduced. It's important to note that the GOF legislation is not aimed at improving any safety requirements for the research. It is only aimed at funding policy.

The language of the bills is very vague, and many researchers worry that the legislation would make it illegal to federally fund any vaccine research in the U.S. This would mean a complete privatization of vaccine research. Pharmaceutical companies would still be free to carry out the allegedly dangerous research because it is (typically) privately funded.

Interestingly, if you do a deep dive into the policy history, and everything that has led to this moment, you will find that an updated set of policy guidelines has been in the works since last summer. The updated policy may even be extend to the creation of mandatory oversight laws for private research. Meaning that the updated policy guidelines which are due to be released by May of 2025, would not only address the safety concerns which are being used to justify the GOF legislation for federal funding, they may even result in safety improvements and oversight across the private sector.

So, why do so many law makers seem to be in such a rush to pass these bills that will only privatize the allegedly dangerous research?

The article is broken up into 5 sections including the introduction. The main focus of this article is GOF funding policy history, which is covered in sections 1-3. The last two sections briefly focus on the legislation attacking the research, and some potential motivations for vaccine research privatization.

I am planning two individual follow up articles that will cover these last two sections in greater depth. My goal is to spread public awareness of this information, to defend science and improve public health. Please help me do that by either sharing the article or just by spreading this information by word of mouth.

Thank you!

 

Ok, so I am a U.S. researcher who has ended up here bc of censorship issues on other platforms.

I understand why rules for no self promotion exist in general, but typically I would consider that to be things like promoting a business or anything with a paywall or with the goal to get more attention for self vs the goal to spread information that is being suppressed.

I started writing a blog on ghost and putting some information together to raise awareness about science and other policy disinformation. Would sharing the information or graphics from the blog still be self promotion since it's my own blog

If it is self promotion, are there any good communities where this kind of things is ok to share?

 

Does anyone know of any communities that might be helpful for creating a shared place to track the "small government" DOGE taskforces that are popping up all over the country?

I've been piecing together what I can and my state has really gone off the rails with this. I'd really like to find a place to collaborate with others and collect evidence of how these supposedly small government actions are using the same playbook as the D.C. DOGE to aid some of the most powerful individuals and biggest corporations in the U.S.

view more: ‹ prev next ›