this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2026
453 points (98.9% liked)

politics

29610 readers
2781 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Palantir CEO and Trump ally Alex Karp is no stranger to controversial (troll-ish even) comments. His latest one just dropped: Karp believes that the U.S. boat strikes in the Caribbean (which many experts believe to be war crimes) are a moneymaking opportunity for his company.

At the New York Times’ DealBook Summit on Wednesday, Karp was asked about the worries over the unconstitutionality of the boat strikes.

“Part of the reason why I like this questioning is the more constitutional you want to make it, the more precise you want to make it, the more you’re going to need my product."

This is bond-level villainy.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Apparently free speech is when you can't criticize Israel but can advocate for war crimes.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Free Speech is when you have money and the more money you have the more free your speech is.

Crazy to even talk about "Making War Crimes Legal", as though this is anything more than a bureaucratic speed bump for the Thielist Techno-Theocracy.

[–] PissingIntoTheWind@lemmy.world 9 points 23 hours ago

Not saying someone should assassinate this guy. But man would it be convenient for someone to off this guy.

Also he has meth teeth. Bro is a drugo.

[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 8 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I will keep saying this till I die, aspiring to be a billionaire is a very strong sign of multiple mental diseases involving addiction and sociopathy.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

I would argue that "aspiring to be a billionaire" is more of a fantasy than a fixation in the population at large. People don't really get to choose whether they become billionaires, as they have very little control over the mass appeal of their business ventures.

I would counter that becoming a billionaire is what results in multiple mental illnesses, as the rapid elevation of social status, the alienation from your non-billionaire peers, and the functional immunity from legal censure drives you insane.

Like, JK Rowling didn't set out to become a billionaire when she wrote Harry Potter. But once her net worth crested into the nine-figures, her mouth-brain barrier disintegrated along with any sense of humility or decency.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Those monkeys would kill the shit out of the hoarder long before scientists got a hold of it.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

that monkey that loses its shit for equal pay lives rent free in my mind.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Scientists would study that monkey

Well, jokes on the scientists. We've killed most of the primate population and now we're moving on aggressively to the homo sapiens sapiens. So no more monkeys. No more bananas. And the scientists are on notice.

[–] chilicheeselies@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

Ill bet my nuts that this guy is on drugs.

[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

[Karp]>“Part of the reason why I like this questioning is the more constitutional you want to make it, the more precise you want to make it, the more you’re going to need my product."

Blowing up unarmed fishing boats is not a "constitutional question" it's a straight-up criminal act. War crimes are well-defined, so there's no wiggle-room about what one IS.

The problem with constitutional immunity is that it protects indiscriminately. And presidents are using it to commit acts of barbarism rather than as necessary acts to protect national security.

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

War crimes are well-defined, so there’s no wiggle-room about what one IS.

It's not a war crime actually. A nation state cannot declare wars on individuals under which the war crime would come about. Article 7 of the Rome statute (The UN thing that defines war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, etc.) defines blowing up civilians as a crime against humanity.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Too many Lex Luthors walking around these days.

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 1 day ago (4 children)
[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] GirthBrooksPLO@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

The patron saint of consequences.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

When I was a kid, all I wanted was to be rich so I couid be Batman. How did we end up in this world full of jokers?

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Therein lies the problem. When I was a kid all I wanted to be was spider-man so I could help people.

Notice the difference?

Batman/Iron Man/ et. al are ok as heroes but really their super power realistically should be the number of people they could lift out of poverty with that money. The fact that they haven't speaks volumes.

I don't blame the writers per se. They exist in a world same as ours so God forbid a billionaire give away all their money because no one needs all that money.

[–] Earthman_Jim@lemmy.zip 2 points 18 hours ago

I also wanted to help people, and be spiderman. My point was when I thought of having a lot of money I thought of the good I could do with it, which is clearly not how the rich think.

In the defense of Batman he does actually try to lift people out of poverty in lots of versions. Wayne industries is basically the only thing keeping Gotham vaguely functional because that city is quite literally cursed while also being in New Jersey.

Like it varies by version but at least with the animated version Batman is dumping cash into charities, job programs, urban revitalization program, infrastructure expansion and repair, and probably some things I'm forgetting. Point is Batman knows that the difference between crime and prosperity is poverty, which he has done his best to eliminate, now he's stuck with the personally and ideologically motivated as well as the weirdos. Hell some versions of Batman have cured Mr. Freeze and Nora once he found out what was going on with that.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I feel like the Joker would have kicked these guy's asses.

[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

It’s true. The joker is just in it for the love of the game. In reality he also hates fascists.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 8 points 1 day ago

Eh, Lex Luthor although a fictional character seems way too competent to be compared to these mustache twirling villains.

[–] Hadriscus@jlai.lu 20 points 1 day ago (3 children)

damn I dream of letting this guy loose in the forest at night, butt naked, so I can hunt him with my dogs. They love the scent of fear

[–] mazzilius_marsti@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

him, spez and donnie

[–] 800XL@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

I hear bloodhounds are great animals for such an endeavor.

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Bear country.

[–] MushuChupacabra@piefed.world 71 points 1 day ago

Palantir is the enemy of humanity.

He created a company named after the evil wizards spy glass, he is not subtle about his villainy

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 6 points 1 day ago

If we just make murder legal, I'll be able to murder anyone I want! Wouldn't that be great? Give that to me, I have to have it, I demand it.

MAGA: Okay.

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Do we need a purge? One day per year for doing something about the CEO problem?

He is correct, but the conclusion to draw from that is that the system that allows those businesses to exist needs to be remedied.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 24 points 1 day ago

I'm thinking of another thing that can move a lot the businesses: hunting CEOs.

[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 21 points 1 day ago

I'm GLAD we're giving HIM Taxpayer Money INSTEAD of Teachers or Hospitals or Children!

-LITERALLY EVERY Republican Voter!

[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 15 points 1 day ago (4 children)

This dude has got to be trolling otherwise he needs to be put in a mental institution.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (18 children)

Carp, Thiel, Musk, Vance and a bunch of these douchebag technofascists subscribe to this really nonsensical philosophy called “dark enlightenment “ it’s basically just the feudal system with mass surveillance and AI to enforce it. They openly advocate for the dismantling of democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Part of it is to get into the media.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] osanna@lemmy.vg 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

uhh... isn't it the ICC/ICJ who determines what is a war crime and what is not? How would making them legal in the US affect the ICC/ICJ in ANY way?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (4 children)

We’re not subject to the ICC/ICJ.

Never signed that treaty.

In the US what makes a war crime criminal is the UCMJ and various other us law codes. We get rid of things like “no double tapping” and “you can declare no quarter be given” and suddenly it’s legal.

(There is a very pointed distinction between legal and moral. Explaining that to these fucks is useless.)

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›