477
Kash Patel ordered FBI agents to respond to X posts calling him a ‘retard’
(www.telegraph.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2026
477 points (99.6% liked)
politics
31105 readers
2217 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
https://www.specialolympics.org/stories/impact/why-the-r-word-is-the-r-slur
why did we pick this word? Why is moron, imbecile, idiot, etc.. all of those are perfectly a-okay as an insult and no one gets their panties in a bunch. Feels arbitrary.
Feels more like a empty issue to take up arms for so that people can FEEL like they're doing something, while doing next to nothing. It's so easy to word police, it's hard to read up on social causes and systems of oppression. So, instead you get armchair keyboard warriors going "you can't say that!!!!!" and feel like they're making a difference... it's a lazy cause to pacify people, artificially inflated. On the same wavelength as latinx.
imagine it's you. imagine you have to hear it all the time. imagine it's your loved one, or nearly everyone you work with professionally, and you have to deal with it. then imagine that for decades. are you exhausted yet? it gets very old and when the traction finally kicks in and people start going ''OK let's move away from this'' and you pop up going 'why can't we just KEEP being awful! It doesn't hurt MY feelings!!! So who cares!''
I don't have to imagine, I heard it all the time. Among a litany of all other sorts of insults. "slow", "dumb", "moron", "idiot", "dipshit", "special", "widowlicker", etc, etc, etc.....
Policing ONE word isn't do jack shit to solve the bullying problem. It's giving lazy people an easy cause to crusade for that ultimately does nothing. Less then nothing, because once you've convinced yourself that "this word" is the "nono word", you'll let all the others slide. As long as they don't say the "nono word" it's okay...
And actually does more harm than any tangible good. Because the most common misuse of policing the word isn't to protect people.... it's to purity check others. Its a diversionary wedge issue that creates artificial divisions. Instead of stopping bullies, we're stopping eachother.... "oh you called RFK Jr a nono word???? you're a nazi too!!"
so you want people to use the slur? because people recognizing saying it is awful is bad....? it's not a crusade, people get it's bad and don't want to hear it. and yeah one word isn't the issue, as an adult, when you start getting corrected on the one word, you kind of have to be smart enough to see the actual problem and stop with all the other words as well. I don't think it's a coordinated attempt to destroy all decency if we allow people to be upset about a slur.
Nah it's straight up a slur. I'm from the 90s, I remember what we actually called intellectually disabled people. It wasn't any of those other medical terms.
and that was the only thing they were called? They weren't called any other things, at all?
So, what is accomplished by saying "this word" is the nono word? You're not stopping the bullying. Instead, you've picked some arbitrary word, policed it (instead of the issue) and get to feel like you're making a difference (you aren't) while the bullying continues. Except now, you don't care... I mean, so long as they don't say the nono word.....
I care, and that was the big one. I agree language is the least important part, but online it's the most visible sign of disrespect. It goes to creating a more welcoming culture to people with all kinds of disabilities.
Were you around back in the day? It's actually been great seeing people getting less tolerant of ableist language, and behavior. The shit we use to say about our fellow people, just in the mainstream, it all went to such a fucked up culture of disregarding people just because they aren't "like us."
Yep, stupid fucking mods
That’s the same as using certain racial slurs. Refraining from using them is a simple act of respect to those marginalized communities.
“Idiot” or “moron” isn’t commonly understood to be tied to a particular group on a modern context. It’s just a generic insult for a stupid person. Trying to compare that to the word of cocern in this post is comparing apples and oranges. It’s now clearly understood as an ableist word and a marginalized group is asking everyone not to use it, as it has very negative connotations for them.
Likewise, “Latinx” was never accepted amongst the Latino community, and only a tiny percentage of university students, most who weren’t even first generation, even cared about it. Using Latinx or Latine actually demonstrates cultural ignorance, as a gendered language doesn’t actually mean words are male, female, non-binary or anything in between. It’s just the rules of the language.
Using slurs against, or in the presence of marginalized people opens up all their old wounds again, wounds inflicted on them by privileged oppressors. These slurs were created with the intention of dehumanizing, insulting and punching down on certain groups, or implying inferiority of those groups when using it as an insult towards others (you’re equating a person to an “lesser” person of a marginalized group).
If you’re interested in studying systems of oppression, this should be an obvious thing to you. Oppression is perpetuated by direct physical and emotional violence, as well as systemic violence.
If words mean nothing, I suggest trying that theory out by going up to a person of colour and using a certain word to them. Or even call them "colored", which used to be the preferred term.
So if words mean something, perhaps it's worth the time to consider their use carefully.
yes those are exactly comparable. Definitely no difference in historical context at all... pat yourself on the back, you're antibullying saviour!
Do you pat yourself on the back for standing up against bigotry? I would think it's the human thing to do.
Yea, but you're not actually doing anything effective.
Are you helping real people, or just helping yourself? Because tone policing a word when it isn't even being used as slur at a person, but doing it just because you want everyone to know how anti-bullying, anti-bigotry you are........ sorry, that's just self-congratulatory masturbation. And look, I get it, sometimes it feels good to wax poetic in public, I'm just saying, maybe be honest about why you're doing it.
You can project all you like. I don't care. I do think standing up for bigotry is not a good look for you, but that's your call to make.
But you will face consequences if you break the TOS.
My dude, you're the one who gets off putting people down. Not projection. Observation. You're not policing some arbitrary (and redundant) word because it might offend a specific person. You're policing it because it gives you a reason to exercise power.
Especially when you treat every usage as equal without examining the context. If you cared about protecting mentally challenged people, you'd be offended when its targeted at them or when any word is used.... but you don't.... you only care about one word, regardless of context.... and it's because when that word is used, it's punishing time... and what a trip it feels to be "morally superior", now you get to put someone down. You get to ride around on highhorse skeeting your platitudes all over.
Please be cautious here. You have crossed a line that, as a mod, I would remove your comments for incivility and personal attacks. I allow such things to go further when they are directed at myself, but I am certainly done conversing with you. But I think you've made the kind of person you are quite clear.
you know what this kind of context absent policing reminds me of? Jaywalking.
Like, a stupid rule made up that sounds reasonable "Keep people safe and not walking into traffic causing accidents". But that's not how it was policed... instead regardless of context or traffic, anyone caught walking across the road was punished. Not because it was unsafe to do so... but because... they could. You walked on the nono place, time to punish you.
That's kind of what you're doing. You're removing the intention behind something, removing the context, so that all that's left is "having a cause to punish people". Then you get to feel like the big hero who saved traffic... and no one can say you weren't justified, I mean clearly they were on the road (used the word)... so they had to be punished.
edit. Also, "personal attacks"? Talk about a trumped up reason out of thin air. okaybuddy. You don't have cause, but you disagree, so you're making threats. Coolcoolcool.
FTA:
"The R-Word Is a Form of Bullying
Kantar reviewed nearly 50 million social posts in the U.S. over 2 years. Over two-thirds of posts about people with intellectual disabilities were negative and nearly 29 million contained slurs (i.e., using the word “retard(ed)” or other words combined with “-tard”).
Spreading the R-word continues to hurt people with intellectual disabilities—and whether intended or not, is a form of bullying. Using the R-word is the same as using any slur against a minority group. Eliminating this word is a step toward respect for all."
it's a lazy virtue signal so that we eat our own. Likely propagated by right-wing groups who benefit the most from the infighting. It doesn't solve a real issue and instead is just another purity test imposed to artificially create division.
But go off, feel good about yourself, you've done it, you solved bullying!
They also don't like the word mongoloid, and prefer that you don't say "suffers from ...." and more.
People humor them, because.... you know
Because that's how language works. That word has been used to demean, mock, belittle, and cause real trauma to people. That's why using it makes people feel bad, and as sentient, empathetic people, we choose not to use it.
yea.... but so have all those other words too.
Somehow it was decided that one word would be the nono bad word... when literally all of them are used interchangably. But, you only get scolded if you say one of them. And policing its use does make any actual meaningful change. Like, if you wanted to insult a handicapped person, you can still do it using any of other words in the quiver.
How long has the Special Olympics been in charge of what words are appropriate, anyway?
Why humor them? Believe me, the word itself will outlive the Special Olympics.
FTA:
"The R-Word Is a Form of Bullying
Kantar reviewed nearly 50 million social posts in the U.S. over 2 years. Over two-thirds of posts about people with intellectual disabilities were negative and nearly 29 million contained slurs (i.e., using the word “retard(ed)” or other words combined with “-tard”).
Spreading the R-word continues to hurt people with intellectual disabilities—and whether intended or not, is a form of bullying. Using the R-word is the same as using any slur against a minority group. Eliminating this word is a step toward respect for all. "
You realize that undermines your reasoning, right? We should be bullying Kash Patel at every opportunity.
There are plenty of words that can be used to insult someone, if your intention is to bully them. You don’t need to inflict collateral damage to insult one person. The English language is very flexible. Giving up a simple word is an act of respect.
You and everyone else downvoting in this thread are using the same logic as an alt-right dweeb who gets enraged when you “steal” bigoted language from them, or ask them not to misgender someone. Which is dumb, because you’re stealing nothing. It’s saying “Hey, that word is terrible for me hear, it brings back lots of bad memories, so out of respect could please not use it?”
Damn, people want to appear to be against oppression, racism and other things yet can’t even be bothered to modify their behavior in the simplest of ways to respect other living beings. We really are all fucked.
Patel is worthy of bullying, but not in a way that causes collateral damage. Same as if people were using racial slurs. Those would get removed too.
This comparison to racial slurs is unbelievably insulting and degrading.
Racial slurs are tied to a history of oppression, slavery, assault, abuse, generational damage, and legacies of trauma.... and what you're saying is: "wahhh he called me DUMB!!1! that's JUST like calling me a racial slur!!!111!"
You're not protecting people with this statement. You're cheapening what "slur" means.
If you aren't one of the people impacted by this, you have no legitimate opinion. See the comments replying to you.
This is why slurs are not allowed.
Way to pass the buck and do nothing. Easy to see why you're a mod.
It literally costs you nothing to behave like a decent human being, why do otherwise?
you might consider looking into history connected to people with disabilities. it's not pretty.
https://connect.springerpub.com/content/book/978-0-8261-8063-6/part/part01/chapter/ch01
They are not remote comparable and you know it. Knock off your bullshit.
So Hitler exterminating the intellectually disabled didn’t happen? Weren’t the “invalids” thrown into sanitariums, alms houses and poor farms with horrible conditions? Didn’t Scandinavian countries institute forced sterilization of disabled individuals in the early 20th century? Weren’t children born in antiquity with intellectual disabilities abandoned and/or left exposed to die?
did you look over the text provided?
you may be interested to know that (perceived, implied, or misattributed) disability and racial / ethnic discrimination have significant overlap in the last couple hundred years. fascinating to me to see a lot of posters on this thread claiming antifacism, who don't understand how ableism and eugenics movements were intended to target both people with disabilities and "undesirable" minorities, often by conflating those groups.
on a more personal note, of all the shit one of my kids has experienced, the use of r-slur seems to have particularly bothered him. FOR YEARS.
so knock it the fuck off!
no
You think linking to one particular source that tries to explain the problem means they're in charge?
Well, I guess Lemmy bows to that organization considering it's in the Lemmy TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
You don't have to like the rules, but you certainly have to follow them.
Shhhhh the purity testing wokescolds will hear you.....
Reminder that ableist slurs are against the Lemmy.World TOS. Please refrain.
NGL, my own autistic brother would call (and has called) Patel a retread.
As an insult it is less about denigrating actual handicapped folks and more about calling the subject of the insult a specific level of stupid. One that is very often less capable that most people who are disabled.
God knows my own brother who is on the spectrum could outperfom Patel, simply because he's an honest, capable man with integrity.
So? Is ableism by someone on the spectrum supposed to be acceptable? Do I need to find a person who is black to give me permission to use the N word? Maybe I should find a woman to give me permission to be misogynist?
That's not it at all. It's about not being so high handed to assume someone with disabilities needs you to define what they will - or will not be - offended by. I as a woman give you permission to be the biggest misogynist on the planet if it gives you a chubby, knock yourself out! Then again, I can be a total raging cunt and don't give a shit if you are.
You are not and will never be responsible for my emotions.
Perhaps you misunderstand, so let's go back to the basics.
Lemmy.World TOS prohibits the use of, among other things, ableist slurs.
If you use such slurs, expect to face consequences.
I am a Lemmy admin, and part of what I do is enforce the TOS when I see violations.
We may choose to simply remove rule-breaking comments, or hand out temp-bans or perma-bans to those that can't seem to follow the rules.
If you cannot follow the rules, I suppose you will eventually find out the consequences for yourself.
So ultimately, I don't care if you agree with the TOS or not. Only whether you follow them.
When the TOS, as stated, seems ambiguous.. it begets the immediate issue between you and I as being that as I have NOT used a slur.. as an admin, you find my plainly stated diffidence to "white knighting" (..as if those with disabilities have no agency..) for others offensive.
And that's okay by me.