this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2026
167 points (99.4% liked)

Political Memes

12295 readers
2422 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 6 points 42 minutes ago

I'm so happy to see this.

[–] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 6 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

A pretty huge amount of people on the epstein files though are just individuals who were emailing regarding grants, donations, etc

Which is extremely normal, they just email all rich benefactors known for donating to causes.

Id expect like over half the names in the files just fall under that category...

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

The difference here is that they continued to engage in correspondence after his conviction.

[–] kungen@feddit.nu -4 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

I'd have no problems taking dirty money, as long as I wouldn't need to do anything for it... am I just dumb, or why would it be immoral to make dirty folk less-rich?

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 7 points 41 minutes ago (1 children)

Ethics are important in science

[–] kungen@feddit.nu 0 points 15 minutes ago

Thanks, that's good point! it's refreshing when smart people don't feel the need to be rude.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I'm sure the women you work with would be so pleased to know that the pursuit of science is much more important than holding a sex-trafficking rapist and pedophile accountable. It would make them really comfortable to be around you.

[–] kungen@feddit.nu -2 points 49 minutes ago (1 children)

That wasn't the question. My question was, how would he be benefiting from me taking his money?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 1 points 48 minutes ago (1 children)

You don’t see how it’s immoral to take funding from Epstein?

[–] kungen@feddit.nu 0 points 45 minutes ago (1 children)

I can also dodge questions by asking a different question. Is it immoral to steal from billionaires?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 1 points 44 minutes ago (1 children)

It’s essentially signing off on his other actions by engaging in business as usual after his conviction.

I didn’t think I needed to spell that out to anyone who wasn’t an Epstein supporter.

[–] kungen@feddit.nu -1 points 38 minutes ago (1 children)

Maybe it's some kind of language barrier, but my definition of business is "any activity or enterprise entered into for profit". So again, where would his profit be in giving me money with no strings attached?

How do you get so caught up in thinking wrong? I asked a hypothetical question and you're acting like I'd ever support him? The only negative thing about him being killed is that his victims can't get retribution.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works -2 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

It's the soft power of being charitable. There's reasons that the rich fund projects like this - it's to make people like you defend them even after they've committed terrible crimes against humanity.

[–] kungen@feddit.nu 1 points 26 minutes ago (1 children)

make people like you defend them

I have never defended anyone with excessive wealth in my entire life, and especially not a sex trafficker or other criminals. Do you normally slander people, or what's your problem with putting false words into someone else's mouth?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works -1 points 22 minutes ago (1 children)

You are arguing with me right here and right now how it should be totally OK to take this predator's funding.

[–] kungen@feddit.nu 0 points 16 minutes ago (1 children)

No, I have never done that. You're slandering me yet again.

A refresher: I originally asked what the problem would be. And then it took me asking 4 different times before you gave the answer "soft power". You could have just done that originally, instead of being toxic and insulting me.

Not everyone is as smart as you, why do you have to be such a jerk about it?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works -1 points 13 minutes ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago) (1 children)

"Just asking questions"

I have no patience for someone asking why taking funding from Epstein is a bad thing. Read the post. There's a reason DinoCon put their foot down. They BANNED those scientists who thought the same as you. It's deplorable. It's right there in the post from DinoCon.

Everyone should have no tolerance for allowing this behavior to go unchallenged. That's one of the main reasons Epstein was so successful.

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 1 points 4 minutes ago (1 children)

What about people doing business with Trump? What about people doing business with the U.S. government under Trump? What about all federal government jobs? What about working for any company that gets any kind of direct or indirect federal subsidies?

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 minutes ago

The US government is different than an individual like Epstein.

If they were dealing with Trump as a businessman and not the president, I'd have the same view.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip -2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Is that expected of paleontologists?

I mean really, honestly most people didn't give a shit about Epstein until someone suocided him. And even then, gave very few shits until earlier this year.

Like I'd expect that bar for politicians, celebrities, public figures...people who have money to begin with and staff to tell them that this person shouldn't be associated with...I don't know if I can set that same expectation on academics reaching out for funding from somebody whose been known to fund academia.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

You don't think the line should be drawn at pedophilia?

What are we doing here? We're wholesale signing off on supporting a prolific and dangerous pedophile?

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 57 minutes ago)

Epstein wasn't a household name until his death; even post "suicide" and the revelations about his pedo empire it's still not common for people to extensively research the background of strangers they're cold-calling, and Epstein had more than enough money to SEO away reports of his conviction.

If you didnt know him or weren't told directly about him being a pedo, it was unlikely that you could have known about him at the time. Most of the folks in the epstein files did know him though - and it's pretty easy to check which group someone falls into.

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 5 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

I don't think being wrongfully persecuted for being in the Epstein files is a thing. It's kinda the point of the meme that plenty of scientists did go on his plane and to his island. And some of those emails from scientists were commiserating over how "me too has gone too far".

But sure, not all scientists....

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 hour ago

Funding is way more important than holding a pedophile accountable. /s

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Yeah but what paleontologist doesn't get excited when the insanely rich guy funding your research shows up and offers them to take a plane ride to his private island?

That's literally the stuff of movies, man.

He was a shitty human but he did appreciate science/academia...or at least that's what his public spending seems to have indicated.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago

Yeah but what paleontologist doesn’t get excited when the insanely rich guy funding your research shows up and offers them to take a plane ride to his private island?

Paleontologists that aren't pedophiles that want to go to pedophile island?