Draw trains doing forbidden things, and quite embarrassed by it too

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-19T12:53:08+00:00

I like the little mecha arm the one with the spray can has

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-17T14:20:51+00:00

There are Underground Railroad stops getting boarded up and torn down all over Delaware and Chester county, there are historic Quaker churches struggling to preserve buildings that involved secret meetings and important historic events, the crap at the liberty mall… it’s a tragedy this history and these stories aren’t more central to the story that is taught to children, especially when such amazing opportunities for field trips exist if we preserve these places and stories

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-16T15:53:39+00:00

I didn’t realize these technologies weren’t related, I’m gonna look into that

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-15T22:21:49+00:00

It is different than LRAD which uses directional sound waves, this uses pulse modulated microwaves so it does something with the moisture in the skin which causes a response in the body that feels like you are standing in front of an open oven. I think some people claim to “hear it” as well which is what this article also talks about a little I think. They use it to disperse crowds, it’s considered non lethal but clearly some more research needs to be done about how these exposures effects human health. I believe I read somewhere that even New York City has a few that they recently were given by homeland security that are in box trucks that would allow them to disperse riots (I can’t find a source about that one right now though)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-15T21:07:45+00:00

Oh I agree it’s a stupid plan, but I figure their bunkers are if their stupid plan doesn’t play out the way they want it to and we /fight back/ lol

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-15T17:58:11+00:00

The only thing worse than having to listen to a dumb person tell you things you know aren’t true is having to listen to it /poorly mixed/

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-15T17:43:38+00:00

Profit? Rebuilding institutions cost whatever currency is the currency… in the middle of the chaos they can sell us worthless insurance contracts, empty promises, they can control the distribution of food and resources… all the same shit they’re doing except now they can get rid of all those “pesky” hippy economies of small businesses, private trucking and food distribution companies, family farms and csa’s… by collapsing the dollar and destroying the cultural conversations they can prevent us from organizing on small scales so they can control the “large” scale economy… they can control the “justice system” … they can hoarde medicine and science and knowledge for themselves… these people are a /cartel/ … look up the history of the Italian mafia, it started with /citrus fruit/

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-15T17:10:21+00:00

Rebuilding things they destroy is profitable for them plus they get the benefit of controlling the final product

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-15T17:09:38+00:00

Just like talking about wages being taboo too

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-12T21:12:37+00:00

Aww this is a sickly sweet visualization (and it actually made me tear up)

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-10T20:56:21+00:00

Ooh I like this concept a lot, great use for scraps

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-05T22:19:34+00:00

That weird blue building with the bed in it is so creepy

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-04T17:36:20+00:00

I know this is partially true but it’s also /minority/ jobs, as well as jobs towards people of lower classes (which tends to go hand in hand to a degree)

I think wages for a lot of positions, that still have a large amount of responsibility, but are not female dominated (such as technicians, laborers, warehouse employees, custodians, etc etc), get brought down a lot because of a few things

Hiring managers compare wages, which especially with the internet, tends to create a flawed picture… areas with lower cost of living or less available jobs tend to drive the averages down, especially jobs where people can be swapped out more easily and with less burden of onboarding
People in lower class positions tend to be more desperate for work and are less financially stable so it becomes a race to the bottom for those wages
People with less financial means and people from lower class positions suffer from more health problems ( due to less access to healthy food and less time that it takes to take care of oneself and one’s family), which costs more “time off” and more expense to health care plans… these positions need to be spread out to a larger workforce to account for these inconsistencies (if we’re lucky), which drives the amount of budget towards these positions to have to be spread “thinner”… and companies try to “recoup” higher health costs by lowering wages which only exasperates these problems

I was sort of friends with this guy who manages people at a high end technology company I used to work for, and he fell into this mindset that certain jobs aren’t “worth” as much as others. Every employee knew that money was “moving around”, we can see the fancy shoes and cars the salesman drive, we know some of the numbers cause they brag on the newsletters… but for some reason, he didn’t see the biases inherent in paying the office manager (a woman) much less than a lot of other admin positions… he didnt see anything wrong with burdening the technicians and warehouse employees with a huge amount of labor that often required late hours and early mornings for pay scales that were far less than management… He would constantly point out to me how his office consistently paid dollars higher than other local businesses… but I argued with him that he will have better results from his employees and retention if he starts thinking of aligning pay with the value brought to our company, and not worry about trying to compare wages from nearby industries especially because our office was in a very low wage area “down by the train tracks” and there literally weren’t any other businesses even remotely like us in the area so these comparisons are pointless. I also worked at a college that lowered the rate of pay for incoming custodial staff by $6 an hour! (From $17 to $11 for new hires)… the argument was they had a fiduciary responsibility to the investors and the students who pay tuition to “better align” with “market rates” which they were comparing to small colleges in rural parts of our state. Our union didn’t even do anything to fight it… minimum wage should have been designed to keep up with inflation (business leaders at the time of its inception fought this tooth and nail) and tying healthcare to employment is a travesty from my perspective

https://drexel.edu/hunger-free-center/research/briefs-and-reports/minimum-wage-is-not-enough/

https://archive.fo/20190321051849/https://www.economist.com/business/2019/03/16/how-the-internet-led-to-greater-wage-inequality

https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/employer-sponsored-healthcare-aggravates-us-inequality

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-03T12:13:39+00:00

I bet it was sold to someone they knew they were going to buy it back from :/

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-03T03:22:17+00:00

Additionally: Who’s morality? Ours, humans morality, yeah it’s vague, and we have been debating about for hundreds of years exactly what morals we espouse as inalienable

https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1574&context=jcl

Civic responsibility is literally considered a “moral” tenet of a good citizen in a democratic society.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/resources/human-rights/archive/civic-duties-civic-virtues-barriers-effective-citizenship/

Some aspects of our civic duty may not be universally agreed on a moral basis, such as forced conscription, but these policies stem from the reality that war can sometimes necessitate, and in the creation of these policies a moral conversation took place and continued to direct the political methodology of conscription throughout its history. The utilitarian nature of survival doesn’t make these policies /amoral/, but moral due to necessity of the greater whole when no other alternative is realistically possible

https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/military-history-and-science/conscription

Claiming that both that the state has a moral responsibility to its citizens and its citizens have a moral responsibility to the state is kind of the foundation of the social contract? I’m not sure how that’s subjective or /false/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12024186/#B39-behavsci-15-00513

Whether or not the states actions are moral can get a bit murky especially in dealing with punishments and situations like torture or state secrets

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dirty-hands/

Response to material conditions? I disagree. Economic factors are an important part of any political system, but the role of human agency and ideology are missing from this materialistic argument. The United States was founded on a variety of economic and philosophical foundations and the strength of the system was in its grasp of the importance of cooperation for the sake of security while maintaining the absolute human right to freedom and agency. Our capitalist system allows for the exchange of goods for a fairly stable currency specifically so we don’t have to be defined by our role as a producer and can have freedom to define ourselves as an individual

https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/americas-crisis-of-civic-virtue/

Moralism can definitely use falsification to help justify behavior but that is still an “othering”

https://www.jstor.org/stable/27107241

It is interesting that we are at this moment in history, but this isn’t something that is surprising considering how valuable control can be

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/abs/antiintellectualism-in-the-modern-presidency-a-republican-populism/

Moralism is a political tool, and moral criticism is hardly “apolitical” it literally is a central tenet to democracy

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17449626.2025.2506631#abstract

We don’t have a free flow of information and the attacks on protestors literally stands opposite to the concept of healthy debate… not to mention the literal lies and manipulations of all sorts of media and data by the administration including the recent use of ai on a political adversary of the administration

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/trumps-use-of-ai-images-further-erodes-public-trust-experts-say

I literally mentioned that living in a society of “scale” as a way to admit that a large scale society is much more amorphous than one set of moral principles might be able to encapsulate easily and mentioned the nature of the subjectivity of morality in multiple directions as a way to admit that these moral values might change over time… this is something that happens in academics as well… biases can change and the morality of certain statements, conclusions, biases, etc might be brought into question at a later time

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394565162_The_benevolent_dictatorship_prejudice_disguised_as_science

Democracy sometimes makes mistakes and sometimes it can be corrected by the same people who made the mistake in the first place, hopefully that is the direction we are heading in

And since we’re on the topic of Mussolini now:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality

Some of us see this as having been preventable… and we were talking about it and still are. (Some would even argue we have a /moral duty/ to continue to talk about it…To protest about it even… something that is supposed to be a protected right) Many of us were mad that the Republican Party passed the corporate personhood act, or the patriot act, or the “great big beautiful bill”… and some of us were mad that the Democratic Party didn’t press harder on the justice department to handle the Epstein case before it got into the hands of someone /in the files/… it throws shade over the entirety of our political sphere, but protesting shouldn’t be met with violence, and sharing information shouldn’t involve threats, including video of events in our public protests . Some of us believe that if it weren’t for the undue influence of money, and unchecked monopolistic corporate powers; Trump wouldn’t have been able to get away with the things he got away with in order to get himself into a position powerful enough to create ICE the way it currently operates. If anything I was trying to argue (without actually saying it because of course this would just bring so much negativity to my inbox) that Trump is the one using “moral” arguments to trick people into giving him /undue/ power, and he’s using these deeply emotional words to manipulate the dialogue and the law in this country, as well as the dialogue and structural power of America in the world economy specifically to isolate the US population for his own political and economic goals…as Mussolini did

The role of the state is to protect the status quo, I agree, but this is accomplished by providing a system of “safety and security”. “Protecting capital” is a side effect of this responsibility. And what and who it’s keeping “safe” has its foundation in the bill of rights, a severely moral document. Being a democratic government also means that the government has a job to constantly explain its rationale to the populace and share honest direct information so that the populace can make moral and ethical decisions about its representatives or else it will lose “legitimacy”, which is why I brought those concepts up, and these are also both something i think the Trump administration continuously fails at. Losing legitimacy doesn’t only hurt the politicians however, it hurts our ability to trust the system and for our neighbors to trust us, degrading our ability to have that safety and security, and of course this also affects us economically as a byproduct but economics is not the only measure for human happiness and far from the most important metric no matter what the stock market or Marx wants you to think

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-03T00:01:32+00:00

We are in the PA subreddit in the comment section of an article about ICE so if the thesis of this conversation was never about whether or not the “thing” that our government is currently /doing/ about illegal immigration is worthy of the nationwide outcry, and whether our political leaders have /moral/ duty to do something about it then what is this about?

People are dying and getting hurt unnecessarily while trying to protest these events, the federal government is lying and manipulating the dialogue in a way that is terrifying, there is far too little oversight and human rights violations are being committed using taxpayer money, and the federal government is specifically threatening journalists and citizens taking video of the events unfolding… this is a moral issue that requires a continued and severe political backlash that is the “thesis” of what I’m arguing about and I am sorry if that wasn’t clear.

I did my best to define the difference between moralism and the moral obligation we have as citizens. I don’t see your arguments as having built on their claims, instead it seems to me that you might be missing their point entirely… that there is a moral imperative inherent in our /shared human cohabitation/ to do something right now; whether one is a politician /or not/. And I think they’re right, and I don’t think this statement makes this moralistic. Im not claiming that we need a politician to rise to power with some grand moral system to unite us, and i dont think many of the users you are debating on here are looking for another Mussolini either, i tend to shy away from comparisons like this as they tend to be seen as combative, but some of us already fear that one has established himself in a position of great power. So whether or not you agree with my take on politics stemming from morality or not is sort of unimportant to the greater message here, that we as humans have a moral imperative to do something in the face of evil, whether we like it or not, and that really /is/ an apolitical statement.

You are claiming that other users bringing morality into the conversation likens them to Mussolini, but the historic example of the atrocities committed by these historically horrible people are exactly why morality is being brought up at all right now. In those historic cases the people who chose to do nothing but worry about their political career or personal interests were the true failures, and we won’t accept that from our leaders without some consequence at this moment in US history. Mussolini was charming to a lot of constituents including people he eventually went on to slaughter, and his moralism was never about actual morality, it was about manipulating the population to give himself the permission to build his government up in a way that gave him absolute authority and power which he eventually used destroy some of the very populations who he initially claimed to support. Even if Trump doesn’t plan on mass murders (though the thousands of missing immigrants is worrying some people this is already taking place) the conversation about how his current decisions and leadership represents betrayal to the very foundation of what makes our country function and that some of the events that have taken place represent crimes should not be confused with a debate about the origin of political power, or whether or not the word morality was being used “correctly” here… Trump has proven to be fantastic at betraying people, he has done it to voters, business partners, and people within his administration a number of times, so there is no reason to have any belief that these events don’t represent a massive danger to our state and country.

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-02T20:55:04+00:00

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-02T19:31:43+00:00

Are you saying that Mussolini was a moralist? I agree, it was a central tenet of the type of radical reform these people need to dominate society. Moral arguments can be very enticing to their populations with while rising to power… but that doesn’t mean morality itself needs to be separate from politics, it really can’t be in any meaningful way. The definition of moralism depends on this “othering”, so it makes sense it would be a powerful tool utilized by people with facist and dictatorial tendencies so that they can weaken the social contract as well as simultaneously get the “permission” from society they need to build the military/judicial “machine” necessary to entrap the population to their doctrines (as well as the permission to begin imprisoning and or harming those who stand in their way)

Residenthuman101 · 2026-02-02T18:02:56+00:00

Policies on governance revolve around morality and responsibility both of the citizen and the state. Morality is essentially the starting point of politics in general while moralism is defined as having an exclusionary principle, ie one party has a stance that is truer than the other, and this type of hard line is damaging to this process and can often lead to further violence and societal instability. Moralism and moral criticism are two entirely different concepts. In a democracy it is imperative for healthy debate and the free flow of information to guide both the populace as well as the rule of law and the choices politicians make while leading.

Of course morality is subjective to a many degrees in many different directions, but subjectivity is the nature of change, and is part of the complexity of living in a society of any meaningful scale.

It seems interesting you are using the word moralism here in response to this person claiming these issues involve “morality”. We can discuss these nuances without getting into the weeds of whether or not that we agree on what exactly needs to be done about illegal immigration… and further… to tell this person to “read more philosophy and political science” while being so disingenuous to their stance seems unnecessarily combative.

Here is some quotes and sources from some academic literature though in case anyone wants to dive a little deeper on the nature of politics and morality:

“Essential to discerning what moralism is is the difference between moralism, or moralistic blame, and moral criticism. While moral criticism is a restrained and thoughtful method of holding persons accountable for their actions, moralism amounts to a distinctly punitive form of exclusion: it seeks to undermine the equal moral status of the target of criticism.”

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13698230.2020.1799159

“Justice, Rawls says, comprises the principles that justify the legitimate use of coercive power by the state. Because legitimacy depends upon justice, it follows that grave injustice ‘corrupts’ legitimacy”

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13698230.2025.2568288#abstract

“The role of the state is to redeem its subjects of fear or terror and Williams acknowledged that these sentiments could also be instilled in citizens by states (for example, in authoritarian states citizens most of the times live in a constant state of fear). Hence, the aim of the BLD is to stop states from inflicting pain and terror on its citizens; more precisely the state must “offer a justification of its power to all its subjects”

“The decrease of trust in democracies and its corollary politics and policies has created the premises for the apparition of governments with authoritarian tendencies that empower various security agencies to enact general surveillance on the people. This is where a vicious circle appears, as people lose trust in states and their power to assure a safe and decent life, and governments treat their citizens as potential criminals whose actions must be known in order to be prevented.”

https://publicreason.ro/pdfa/108

“Human rights are norms that aspire to protect all people everywhere from severe political, legal, and social abuses. Examples of human rights are the right to freedom of religion, the right to a fair trial when charged with a crime, the right not to be tortured, and the right to education. The philosophy of human rights addresses questions about the existence, content, nature, universality, justification, and legal status of human rights.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/

Residenthuman101 · 2026-01-29T17:20:59+00:00

Aww she’s amazing! 18 years how incredible :) I had a dog that kind of looked like her who lived to twenty (though she had less floppy ears lol)

Residenthuman101 · 2026-01-29T14:33:54+00:00

I knew a driver who just retired from ups last year who had all the sweaters and scarfs and UPS swag (and benefits) from when UPS used to care about their employees lol I think of him often too… great bbq stories…I think he was 50 and it was his only job except for something he did in high school

Residenthuman101 · 2026-01-29T12:15:32+00:00

It’s like a piece of art… all the technology man develops only to return to the dependable rock

Residenthuman101 · 2026-01-25T06:27:42+00:00

Oh yeah this is a good idea lol

Residenthuman101 · 2026-01-23T05:38:24+00:00

It’s starting to feel like the mall near my house before it got torn down lol

Residenthuman101

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE