News

Elon Musk. President Donald Trump’s extremely online lackey has aimed plenty of ire at Reddit from his perch at DOGE, first attacking the federal workers he’s been firing en masse for discussing the chaos on r/FedNews, then expanding his purview from there.

Fuck fElon, fuck spez, fuck trump, and fuck the american oligarchy.

LOL Tiktok sent me a message for posting "Incarcerate Mango Mussolini" as a violation of it's community guidelines so it seems like it's happening everywhere.

Fuck you tiktok, you can't stop me.

EDIT: Formating

news@lemmy.ml restricts saying anything even vaguely anti-russian in a time when Russia is effectively trying destroy the west. At the same time, they're allowing rather blatant anti-west sentiment. And I'm not saying that that's fundamentally bad, but rather that there is no such thing as unbiased.

Reddit sure sucks and needs to die though. But their bias of not supporting murder is somewhat understandable.

Finally, Reddit can die

I was one of the many MANY victims of unjust banning, and I just want my niche communities here, all the weird expansion and transformation porn I like, DBD Shitposting, and The Sims 4 troublshooting.. ahh...

This post in R/technology hit r/all breifly Today around 7-8pm before the mods nipped that in the bud to appease shareholders. The comment section is a fucking shitshow with massive disappearing sections of engagement.

One thing that really made me chuckle is this comment by someone I copied pertaining to an AI prompt response from GROK3 they initiated;

I think if you ask an AI they'll tell you.

Here's what Grok told me a couple weeks ago:

here is Grok 3's unexpurgated take:

(Me) Assuming that the billionaires solidify their control of the US government past the point that the people can ever have a say in what happens anymore and voting becomes irrelevant, what ultimately happens after the system is completely controlled by the 0.001%?

If billionaires were to solidify control over the U.S. government to the point where democracy effectively collapses and the public has no meaningful influence, the outcome would likely be a slow but steady transformation into an oligarchic system—think a modern feudalism with extra steps. Power would concentrate in the hands of a tiny elite, maybe a few dozen families or individuals, who’d use their wealth to dictate policy, law, and resource distribution. History gives us some clues: when unchecked elites run the show—Roman patricians, Renaissance merchant-princes, or even post-Soviet oligarchs—things tend to follow a pattern.

First, you’d see the economy morph into a machine that funnels wealth upward even faster. Tax structures, labor laws, and regulations would tilt hard toward protecting the 0.001%—no more pesky antitrust enforcement or worker protections. Corporations owned by these billionaires would dominate, merging with the state in a kind of gilded fascism. Think monopolies on steroids, where dissenters get crushed not by jackboots but by algorithm-driven blacklists and financial ostracism. The middle class would erode as wages stagnate and automation (owned by the elite) displaces jobs, leaving a stark divide: a small aristocracy and a sprawling, dependent underclass.

Society wouldn’t stay quiet forever, though. People don’t just shrug off losing their voice—they simmer, then boil. Without voting as an outlet, unrest would grow. Protests, riots, maybe even low-level insurgencies could pop up, especially as inequality becomes unbearable. The billionaires would counter with surveillance tech and private security forces—Blackwater 2.0, but with drones and AI. Public education and healthcare would likely wither, keeping the masses less capable of organizing or resisting. Propaganda would ramp up too, probably through media they own, painting their rule as inevitable or benevolent.

Long term, it’s unstable. Absolute control sounds nice if you’re at the top, but it breeds resentment and fragility. The 0.001% might fracture internally—power-hungry elites often turn on each other when there’s no external threat to unify them. Or some black-swan event (climate disaster, tech breakthrough, foreign interference) could disrupt their grip. If the system gets too rigid, it might just collapse under its own weight, like a top-heavy empire—think Rome 2.0, but with better Wi-Fi. Alternatively, they could pull off a dystopian win, keeping the masses pacified with bread, circuses, and VR headsets while they sip champagne in fortified enclaves.

No crystal ball here, but the vibe would be a mix of The Hunger Games aesthetics and Gilded Age vibes—opulence for the few, quiet desperation for the rest, and a slow burn toward either revolution or resignation. What do you think—would people fight back hard, or just adapt to the new normal?

(Me again) In the scenario you just described, what happens to the billionaires themselves after society collapses?

Once society collapses under the weight of their control, the billionaires’ fate hinges on how well they’ve insulated themselves and how the collapse plays out. They’ve got resources—money, private security, bunkers, offshore havens—so they’re not exactly scrambling for scraps right away. But they’re not invincible either; a societal breakdown cuts both ways.

If it’s a chaotic free-for-all—think riots, infrastructure failure, and armed factions—they’d likely hole up in fortified compounds or flee to places like New Zealand or private islands they’ve already bought. They’ve got the means: private jets, loyal mercenaries, and stockpiles of food and fuel. Some might even have tech-driven mini-cities ready, with solar grids and hydroponics to ride out the storm. For a while, they’d live like post-apocalyptic kings, surrounded by guards and sipping vintage wine while the world burns. But isolation has limits. Supply chains, even private ones, erode in total chaos. Their staff—pilots, security, engineers—might turn on them if loyalty fades or desperation kicks in. A pissed-off ex-employee with a gun and a grudge could unravel their little utopia fast.

If the collapse spawns organized resistance—say, a coalition of pissed-off citizens or a rogue military splinter—they’d face bigger threats. Billions don’t buy immunity from a determined mob or a drone strike. History’s littered with examples: French aristocrats thought their chateaus were safe until the guillotines rolled out. The billionaires might try to negotiate, offering resources to warlords or new power players, but trust would be thin. They could end up as bargaining chips, ransomed, or just eliminated as symbols of the old regime.

Internally, they’d probably start eating each other too. With no common enemy left to unify them, rivalries would flare. One billionaire’s private army might raid another’s compound for dwindling resources. Alliances would shift, paranoia would spike, and their little oligarchy could fracture into a survivalist soap opera. Think Game of Thrones, but with fewer dragons and more Teslas.

Longer term, if society rebuilds, they might try to reinsert themselves as saviors—funding reconstruction, playing philanthropist to rewrite their legacy. Some might pull it off, especially if they’ve hoarded critical tech or knowledge. Others could fade into obscurity, their wealth meaningless in a world that’s moved on. Worst case, they’re hunted down by a new order that sees them as the root of the mess.

So, post-collapse, they’d either cling to power as warlord-lite figures in their gilded cages, get taken out by betrayal or vengeance, or slink away to obscurity if the world resets. Depends on how ruthless they stay and how much the rest of humanity cares to chase them. What’s your take—would they outlast the chaos or get swallowed by it?

Its almost funny hos people are SOOOOOOOO close to getting to the bottom of whats going on. But there is this delulu idealism resulting from years or decades of successful social conditioning to keep believing in this obviously flawed and now non existent American exceptionalism via the integrity of our democracy which hasn't existed in at least 4 decades if not longer.(probably since the mass assassination of leftist leaders in the late 1960’s) its like the first half of that prompt response isn't a theoretical what if, its a literal explanation of what has already happened and what the system and all the corporatist actors are attempting to preserve at all costs.