I can't remember where I found it, but there's a paper or book somewhere that basically states that, in systems of oppression, exceptions to the law for a select elite are not only common, but fundamental to how systems of oppression work.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
As a leftist, I wish others would engage in critical, nuanced thinking instead of regurgitating the same calibre of tired, generic, thoughtless talking points we so often criticize the right for.
Yes, the right is a monolith all united under the single cause of repressing out groups. You've clearly nailed it.
Are you reacting to what you typed out, and then typed this instead? I can't tell what you're reacting to. My comment? It wasn't a lot of words, and they have the same meaning they had when you used them. So I guess you were just posturing for the crowd?
Nuanced thinking doesn't win popularity contests. At best, it only really exists in academia, and even then not that often.
Tired thoughtless ragebait talking points does. Nuanced thinking is the opposite of a 'rallying cry' that so many on the left, and the right, use to motivate their constituencies.
Yet those constituencies are consistently manipulated to act against their best interests by rallying cries and similar polarizing behavior, and pointing it out goes as well as it did here. Most days, I question if humans are intelligent enough to govern themselves. Evidence increasingly points to no.
I mean, that's how human beings work. The boss isn't going to hold himself accountable to his own policies... how many bosses have you had that don't make exceptions to the rule for themselves?
The good ones are the ones who make exceptions for other people, and the bad ones are the ones who only do it for themselves.
Heh. Epstein 2007 plea deal granted non-prosecution to his co-conspirators. The prosecution literally said that everyone else involved is above the law.
On 25 August 2025 the House Oversight Committee issued a subpoena to Acosta requesting his testimony in the Epstein file. His name was not in the initial batch of subpoenas the committee sent out in August, which included Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. His testimony was on September 19.[57] During his September 2025 testimony, Acosta said he did not recall any discussions of "potential financial crimes" in the Epstein investigation. In October 2025, Bloomberg News uncovered email correspondence that showed that Acosta's office did discuss financial crimes and that Acosta was copied on correspondence about it. Records related to the financial crimes investigation were stored in a folder titled, "Money Laundering."[26]
Acosta announced that the Trump administration maintained a goal of one million new apprentices. Following Jeffrey Epstein's arrest in July 2019, on sex trafficking charges, Alexander Acosta faced fresh calls to resign.[82] He resigned as Secretary of Labor effective July 19, 2019.[83] President Trump, standing next to Acosta, said he would have been willing to have him remain.[84][85] Trump said "This was him, not me" and called him a "great, great secretary".[84][85]
Epstein didn't exist and it's all a collective hallucination, stop talking about it.
They did it and they are going to jail (their homes but they are unable to leave pretty please), getting bailed out in two to five years when all blows over. Some of them maybe will show up suicided.
No hopes for the system that rewards the most sociopathic behavior or generational wealth to rise to the top.
In a just world, most of this administration would be behind bars. Same with fElon and Bannon and Stone and other people not necessarily in the administration.
SCROTUS more like it. They are of course wrong and are developing a made up theory about unitary executive power. It has no basis other than allowing for unfettered corruption because conservative policies are so unpopular and destructive that is the only way to enact them.
It's not that I'm not grateful that the UN has published something about this, but when there are 3 separate caveats in the first sentence that "it's totally not us saying this officially!", it emphasizes how useless the UN is at dealing with its blessed founding member. Really disappointing while being in no way surprising.
Sorry to go all grammarnacionalesozcialistsk but it's "No one is too wealthy/powerful for the law to apply to them" or "No one is wealthy/powerful enough to be above the law". These people are supposed to have English degrees…
38 Comments
Chippys_mittens@lemmy.world · 66 pts · 198d
Rooskie91@discuss.online · 50 pts · 198d
I can't remember where I found it, but there's a paper or book somewhere that basically states that, in systems of oppression, exceptions to the law for a select elite are not only common, but fundamental to how systems of oppression work.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 198d
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
AHamSandwich@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 198d
As a leftist, I wish others would engage in critical, nuanced thinking instead of regurgitating the same calibre of tired, generic, thoughtless talking points we so often criticize the right for.
Yes, the right is a monolith all united under the single cause of repressing out groups. You've clearly nailed it.
Linktank@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 198d
Go for it, be the change you want to see. Say something critical and nuanced.
AHamSandwich@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 197d
LOL that's a lot of words with absolutely no meaning. It's just posturing for the crowd, like a child.
Linktank@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 197d
Are you reacting to what you typed out, and then typed this instead? I can't tell what you're reacting to. My comment? It wasn't a lot of words, and they have the same meaning they had when you used them. So I guess you were just posturing for the crowd?
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 197d
Nuanced thinking doesn't win popularity contests. At best, it only really exists in academia, and even then not that often.
Tired thoughtless ragebait talking points does. Nuanced thinking is the opposite of a 'rallying cry' that so many on the left, and the right, use to motivate their constituencies.
AHamSandwich@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 196d
Yet those constituencies are consistently manipulated to act against their best interests by rallying cries and similar polarizing behavior, and pointing it out goes as well as it did here. Most days, I question if humans are intelligent enough to govern themselves. Evidence increasingly points to no.
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 198d
Oh yes, the famous bastions of conservatism surrounding Epstein, like Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, and Woody Allen!
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 197d
I mean, that's how human beings work. The boss isn't going to hold himself accountable to his own policies... how many bosses have you had that don't make exceptions to the rule for themselves?
The good ones are the ones who make exceptions for other people, and the bad ones are the ones who only do it for themselves.
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 198d
Well, you say that...
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 198d
‘No one is too wealthy or too powerful to be above the law’
Oh, I get it! It's funny because it's not true! Ha ha!
realitista@lemmus.org · 20 pts · 198d
The evidence says otherwise but okay...
RaoulDuke25@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 19 pts · 198d
TheCriticalMember@aussie.zone · 17 pts · 198d
Have these experts not heard of America?
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 15 pts · 197d
Heh. Epstein 2007 plea deal granted non-prosecution to his co-conspirators. The prosecution literally said that everyone else involved is above the law.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 197d
Wasn't the prosecutor of that in the files?
ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one · 4 pts · 197d
Alex Acosta became the US Secretary of Labor for the Lumpty Trumpty administration.
Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 198d
programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 9 pts · 198d
They will investigate and find one of two things:
Epstein didn't exist and it's all a collective hallucination, stop talking about it.
They did it and they are going to jail (their homes but they are unable to leave pretty please), getting bailed out in two to five years when all blows over. Some of them maybe will show up suicided.
No hopes for the system that rewards the most sociopathic behavior or generational wealth to rise to the top.
notwhoyouthink@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 198d
Sure. Now let’s stop saying the thing and actually do the thing.
theuniqueone@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 198d
Nice sentiment but I'm not hopeful for it matching reality under the current political system.
CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 198d
Oh my god I wish that actually becomes true.
In a just world, most of this administration would be behind bars. Same with fElon and Bannon and Stone and other people not necessarily in the administration.
epicthundercat@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 198d
They did open up a formal investigation. We will have to see
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 197d
Trump says no. Trump says it's okay for people like him to rape kids.
That's it. That's what's going on right now. Welcome to dystopia.
zbyte64@awful.systems · 6 pts · 197d
He must be referring to Luigi's law.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 198d
SCOTUS says one person is above all laws.
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 197d
SCROTUS more like it. They are of course wrong and are developing a made up theory about unitary executive power. It has no basis other than allowing for unfettered corruption because conservative policies are so unpopular and destructive that is the only way to enact them.
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 197d
"... except when you are a billionaire or you have bribed Trump."
D_C@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 197d
Breaking News From An Orange Paedo In The Whitehouse:
"haHAAhaha HAHAHAHA! Hahahahahahahaha."
minorkeys@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 198d
Unless the law never tries.
ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca · 3 pts · 198d
LOL yes they are. And we're about to find out.
We need an angry mob to hunt them down.
Randomgal@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 197d
Too bad they have literal zero intention of doing anything else other than complaining
fiat_lux@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 198d
It's not that I'm not grateful that the UN has published something about this, but when there are 3 separate caveats in the first sentence that "it's totally not us saying this officially!", it emphasizes how useless the UN is at dealing with its blessed founding member. Really disappointing while being in no way surprising.
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 197d
Sorry to go all grammarnacionalesozcialistsk but it's "No one is too wealthy/powerful for the law to apply to them" or "No one is wealthy/powerful enough to be above the law". These people are supposed to have English degrees…
Wilco@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 198d
Prove it. Arrest them before a bunch of folks have to get in trouble for getting out the guillotine.
Treczoks@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 197d
American politicians and billionaires: "Hold our beers!"
FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 196d
There are no laws. We made the whole thing up.
greenbit@lemmy.zip · 0 pts · 197d
"The law" is made up by them. Some of the factions play with "law & order", some with "power". The structure is the same. It's built for the cattle