President Donald Trump led tributes to Graham, a leading Republican voice on defense and foreign policy, describing him as a “true American Patriot.”
  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    13984·
    2 days ago

    Imma pin this one up for now.

    Please remember the rule on celebrating death. Graham was an asshole, that should be enough.

    In March 2016, Graham said: “I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination.” [1, 2]

      • DarkFuture@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        15 hours ago

        Right? If Hitler rises from the grave and we curb stomp him back into it am I not supposed to celebrate?

        Bad people exist. It’s good when they stop existing. We should be able to acknowledge that. This isn’t Reddit and I never want it to be.

        EDIT: Put some more thought into it. I think it’s important to celebrate the death of objectively bad people because it helps normalize obliterating whatever virtuous image they constructed for themselves while they were alive. Unfortunately, the USA has normalized corruption, that’s not really debatable at this point. We need to normalize publicly shaming corrupt individuals to try to dissuade future bad actors from rising through the ranks and letting the world know exactly how low these corrupt assholes were. And as far as determining whether Graham was a piece of shit or not…well, I’d say if you constantly take advantage of things you actively vote against and flip flop on your statements from one day to the next, you’re a pretty big piece of shit.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          28·
          1 day ago

          It’s cool, you should have seen the crap we removed when Carter died. We aren’t playing sides here, that’s why it’s in the side bar.

          • DarkFuture@lemmy.worldEnglish
            51·
            19 hours ago

            You should just let us downvote them out of existence.

            Far as I’m concerned the only thing that should be removed are slurs and outright misinformation, which includes anti-voter sentiment.

    • Pinto, the Bean@lemmy.worldBanned from community
      33·
      2 days ago

      Mainstream Respectable opinion is that people joking about a bad person’s death represents a culture of cruelty, but really it represents a culture of impunity. It’s a coping mechanism for watching someone do evil their whole life and never seeing consequences.

      • DarkFuture@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        19 hours ago

        Yup.

        We live in a society where the justice system simply doesn’t apply to the rich and powerful.

        All we’ve got is the celebration when nature finally makes them pay the piper.

        I’ll go to whatever platform I need to in order to have that.

    • BillCheddar@lemmy.world
      53·
      2 days ago

      What a weird rule.

      Hitler dies, and we’re not allowed to celebrate? Putin dies, we can’t talk about how great it is that the warmongering fascist is no longer haunting the rest of us with war?

      C’mon.

    • athatet@lemmy.zip
      49·
      2 days ago

      IDK. The rules can say whatever they want. When a person who wants me and my friends dead, dies, I’m going to be happy about it.

    • Krauerking@lemy.lol
      34·
      2 days ago

      The UK has an entire holiday based around burning an effigy of a person you hate… I think we should be able to say we enjoy that he is dead to no longer hurt the living.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        850·
        2 days ago

        You can say what a terrible person he was without celebrating his death.

        Just like the Charlie Kirk responses:

        “I can’t stand the word empathy actually. I think empathy is a made-up, New Age term that — it does a lot of damage, but it is very effective when it comes to politics.”

        • slickgoat@lemmy.world
          19·
          2 days ago

          You need to justify why celebrating someone’s death should not be allowed.

          I’m not advocating for anyone dying, that’s a different bowl of nuts. Virtue signalling one’s own ethical purity might get you off, but it only annoys everyone else.

          • morriscox@lemmy.world
            11·
            15 hours ago

            Maybe we see enough vitriol towards Windows and Mac users, people daring to praise anything that isn’t FOSS, or saying something nice about someone who isn’t a liberal, that even when we are relieved when a certain person is no longer living we don’t want to read dozens or hundreds of me-too posts full of vitriol. There’s the upvote button for that. I’m glad he’s gone but making a separate comment to essentially echo groupthink is (somewhat) a waste of time and effort. In some ways Lemmy is no better than Reddit.

            I know that saying anything that goes against Lemmy groupthink and hatefeasts is guaranteed to get a down vote, but I don’t feel the need to make nasty comments so that I fit in around here.

          • Pinto, the Bean@lemmy.worldBanned from community
            8·
            2 days ago

            Virtue signalling one’s own ethical purity might get you off, but it only annoys everyone else.

            That’s Jordan for you. And then being smug about it too.

                • slickgoat@lemmy.world
                  6·
                  1 day ago

                  I just watched a doco on the Nuremberg trials today in Netflix - by way of coincidence. These guys were the GOATs at instilling a sense of justice and fairness. That was their prime and only job. Guess what, they also celebrated the bad guys deaths. Especially the really bad guy, but also the henchmen like Goring (who topped himself).

                  I’ll not keep on arguing because we are both sick of the topic. I just don’t understand the sacred seperation between permitting calling someone an arsehole when they are breathing, but the moment they stop breathing you can’t say ‘fantastic’. Great news.

                  But as you say, them be the rules, I guess?

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          33·
          2 days ago

          And you can say it’s the 25th of December without celebrating Christmas, but the question is, why would I?

        • TheHound@lemmy.world
          16·
          2 days ago

          He was a terrible person and it is fitting to celebrate that he is no longer alive to impose his views through policy. Not celebrating his death, just the act of him no longer living. Him dying, sad for his family. Him not being alive, good for the nation. It’s a bad rule, do better.

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          12·
          2 days ago

          Define the difference between celebration vrs elation.

          I’m not gonna throw a party but I won’t rule out a hearty chuckle a jaunty happy dance.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            414·
            2 days ago

            Having made an initial pass of the comments, there were really very few removable. Mostly blatant rule breaking like “Good!” and “I am celebrating!”

            The rule states “bannable” but not how long. The minimum I can set is 1 day. I’d probably have gone for something in the hours range, but it is not that granular. 😉

          • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
            4·
            2 days ago

            I see, you’ll understand my confusion as your logo shows two cartoon hands whilst the OP shows… maybe a stump at best.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
              8·
              2 days ago

              That’s just the style. Drawing hands is hard and polandballs are supposed to be simplistic and crudely drawn.

              Also this meme is super old at this point, I think it was originally about McCain.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
      281·
      2 days ago

      This guy was a literal mass murderer akin to a modern day Nazi but keep pretending like there is some “civility”.

    • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
      1019·
      2 days ago

      What, pray tell, is the “rule” about celebrating death? It couldn’t possibly be some absolute Reddit shit, could it?

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        51105·
        2 days ago

        Sidebar rule 6:

        “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.”

        • mechoman444@lemmy.world
          429·
          2 days ago

          The issue is that what is presented as a single rule is actually several different rules crammed into one sentence. It strings together multiple distinct ideas with commas, making it unclear where one prohibition ends and another begins. If each of those ideas is meant to stand on its own, they should be written as separate rules rather than bundled together under a single heading.

          Secondly, “celebrating death” is an extremely vague concept. Many cultures celebrate death in one form or another. Hindus, for example, have traditions that celebrate the passage into the next life. Creole culture also has a long history of turning funerals into communal celebrations.

          Moreover, what exactly constitutes a celebration of death? If someone feels happy that a particular person has died, they are not necessarily celebrating death itself. They are simply acknowledging that someone they disliked is gone and, in their view, that the world is objectively better off as a result.

          So if I say, “I am happy that so-and-so died,” that is not, in and of itself, a morally reprehensible statement. It merely expresses an individual’s emotions. No one is obligated to like another person or to feel sadness when they die. Death itself is not a moral act; the act of taking a life is. In this case, the individual died naturally rather than as the result of anyone’s actions.

          As a result, I see no compelling reason why death itself should never be celebrated, whether the sentiment is meant to admonish the deceased or to honor them.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            334·
            2 days ago

            “or” makes it clear to anyone with an understanding of English that these are each separate items.

            • slickgoat@lemmy.world
              71·
              2 days ago

              One of the great many problems with the"celebrating death" rule (whatever that means) is that much commentary is generated just talking about why it it pointless. The moderators must have already removed the most violent opinions because most of the ones remaining are along the lines of “good, I’m glad”. Pretty tame stuff, but apparently not permitted all the same.

              If it is a rule, at least you have the good sense to realise that “celebration” is a pretty broad term and should be handled judicially.

        • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
          7411·
          2 days ago

          Any good justification for this rule you can think of?

          (Also… weird that you’re not actually enforcing it? Is it a “rule” or not?)

            • Leo Dal Pozzo@infosec.pub
              1084·
              2 days ago

              So if we celebrated hitler’s death we lack humanity? People should be free to celebrate a death if they feel to. Forcing your idea of a moral code over people is not nice. We are not talking about celebrating violence, a crime or wishing for somebody’s death.

              People should be free to express their feelings if they don’t hurt anyone, without having to fear the morality police. The point of modorators should be to create a welcoming and safe space, not to impose your morality on others.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                2169·
                2 days ago

                Doesn’t matter if you think it’s “nice” or not. It’s a rule for this community.

                • Leo Dal Pozzo@infosec.pub
                  418·
                  2 days ago

                  Yes, and you could have answered “thanks for your input, but we are going to stick with our rules because we have our reasons”, instead you basically tell me “Doesn’t matter what you think, these are the rules and you must respect them. No discussion allowed”. I mean sure, you make the rules, but the way you enforce them and react to criticism speaks for itself.

              • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
                2211·
                2 days ago

                No, no, you don’t get it. It’s not about being nice, it’s about telegraphing what a good, nonthreatening supplicant you are

                • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                  1448·
                  2 days ago

                  I already said he was an asshole and cited the reason, that’s not supplication.

                  You don’t have to celebrate death to prove you aren’t a supplicant. 😉

            • D_C@sh.itjust.works
              632·
              2 days ago

              Ahhhh, the “when they go low, we go high” approach.
              Gee whizz, that approach has really been working out so far, hasn’t it…

            • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
              7915·
              2 days ago

              Jesus fucking Christ. We’re really doing this high road virtue signaling bullshit here, too? Cool. Continue being part of the problem, I guess.

                • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
                  257·
                  2 days ago

                  Is there a rule about talking about disliking it? I don’t see one in writing, but it seems like it wouldn’t matter.

            • Stupidmanager@lemmy.worldEnglish
              11·
              2 days ago

              No. This high road bullshit is why we are in the hole we’re in now. You want to play the game, you need to understand the rules. And you naive to think anything else.

              I won’t condone murder, but this fucker deserves his abrupt death and the vitriol that follows. We will always be at the mercy of those fucks because of people like you and it’s time you understand.

            • slickgoat@lemmy.world
              375·
              2 days ago

              Not positive that you should be enforcing your own personal ethics onto other people. Free speech should be a thing. If a person did bad things and people are glad that he is no longer in a position to do bad things, that is a celebration in itself. Trying to enforce opinions like this is self-congratulatory in that you consider your opinion is superior and worthy of judicial enforcement.

              Note that I haven’t in the slightest commented on the man himself, yet still run the risk of banning. It all depends upon the moderator. This happens on Reddit all the time and that’s the problem with this kind of moderation. It has a chilling effect. Give a censor a job and they tend to censor.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                513·
                2 days ago

                Freedom of speech is what the government controls. You have no freedom of speech within a private entity like social media.

                The TOS sets the overall rules, each community further defines them.

                The Lemmy instances which are “do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law” get de-federated pretty damn quickly due to the raw sewage they pump out.

                • DarkFuture@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  19 hours ago

                  Freedom of speech is what the government controls. You have no freedom of speech within a private entity like social media.

                  Totally true. But the reality is people are going to go to whatever platform they feel most free to express themselves on.

                  That’s literally why everyone left Reddit for Lemmy. And they’ll leave Lemmy too.

                  Just making an observation.

                • slickgoat@lemmy.world
                  3·
                  2 days ago

                  I do agree that censorship and freedom of speech are related to how a government deals with the matter, so you are right.

                  However, free speech principles have, thankfully, escaped the confines of government control. People generally like to express an opinion and hear others - particularly on private platforms that are supposedly set up for that express purpose. Sure, set of terms of service putting arbitrary guard rails on ethical grounds (one’s own) and see what that gets you in the long run.

                  Most of us already know the extremities of free speech. Saying ‘great’ when a douchebag stops being a douchebag is hardly ban worthy.

                  Or maybe it is, and if so, welcome to your weather channel.

                • slickgoat@lemmy.world
                  92·
                  2 days ago

                  True, I should probably quit social media altogether. Having opinions is never welcome unless they are authorised opinions.

            • bthest@lemmy.worldEnglish
              132·
              2 days ago

              Ok agreed. No surprise night raping or murdering people in colonial genocide projects that Graham Cracker. I hope we’ll all live to celebrate that fucker dying some day too.

              Now on the celebrations.

          • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
            161·
            2 days ago

            Community rules are aggressively enforced against people the mods disagree with and fairly lax with those they agree. Jordan is usually pretty fair though. But yeah the celebrating death rule is applied very very inconsistently.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              513·
              2 days ago

              Mostly because we physically can’t read every comment and rely on reports.

              Events like this are fairly unique.

              So here’s the situation:

              Last night? I didn’t see anything removable or bannable and went to sleep.

              Waking up today, I had a butt-ton of replies to wade through, then reports, now I’m going through the whole comment tree looking for rule violations.

              So far, as of your comment, it looks pretty clean! I’m impressed!

          • stickyprimer@lemmy.world
            43·
            2 days ago

            I know no one wants to hear this right now but celebrating death degrades us. To join the grim reaper’s cheering section is to sit with the ghouls.

            If you want to convince me there’s some great practical value in it, go ahead and try, but I don’t see it. To me, it’s an act that accomplishes nothing except lowering us. And believe me, I fucking hated Lindsay Graham. I’m glad he will do no more harm, but that’s as far as I prefer to go.

              • stickyprimer@lemmy.world
                41·
                2 days ago

                No, obnoxious is the way y’all are piling your hatred for Lindsay Graham onto this poor mod because he won’t let you rip Graham’s body to pieces inside the community center. As if that would do anyone any good. Straight up fucking scapegoating going on right here. He’s handled you all quite well.

                • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
                  25·
                  2 days ago

                  No one’s forcing him to police adult conversations for decorum in the middle of a cold civil war.

        • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
          311·
          2 days ago

          Maybe amend the rule to “celebrating death of actual human beings”. There’s one person whose death will be celebrated far and wide, for sure.

            • OldChicoAle@lemmy.world
              2·
              19 hours ago

              So you decide when it applies and when it doesn’t? Sounds like this community needs a new mod with some integrity

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                11·
                14 hours ago

                We made an exception for an incredible war criminal, yes. Don’t expect us to do it for everyone.

            • Axolotl@feddit.it
              21·
              2 days ago

              So it’s a highly inconsistent rule that also get lifted when someone the mods hate dies? Holy shit

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
                415·
                2 days ago

                Wasn’t just “the mods hate”. Kissinger was legit a war criminal.

                As much as we all hate Graham, he was not at the same level as Kissinger. Few are.

                • Axolotl@feddit.it
                  7·
                  2 days ago

                  Graham caused some fatalities too, not at the level of a war criminal ofc, but still, he did some pretty bad damage so what i see is just an excuse to celebrate the death of someone you dislike;
                  If everyone is human Graham included then Kissinger is too, yet you celebrated Kissinger death, which mean you deem one less human than the other which just look hypocrisy to me, this whole rule is bullshit but it’s even more bullshit how you all enforce it and remove it as you like for certain people

                  You either enforce it for all or for no one, which IMO the better one is the 2nd option because the rule is just blatantly enforcing your own moral.

                • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
                  9·
                  2 days ago

                  Graham may get a footnote in future history books in the chapter on the fall of democracy in the western hemisphere.

          • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldEnglish
            56·
            2 days ago

            i mean while i agree, i don’t want to get into the habit of dehumanizing people (even if it feels fair play for any given specific person).

              • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                1 day ago

                Maybe we’re thinking of similar things, but I thought it took killing, not dehumanization. I mean it’s easier to convince a bunch of someones to kill someone else if you first dehumanize the someone else to the someones so I get where you’re coming from tho

            • Leg@sh.itjust.works
              34·
              2 days ago

              Agreed. The worst people in history were all still very much human. They had internal complexity that caused them to live the lives they lived and make the mistakes they did. And those humans were terrible people whose deaths deserve celebration, because they’re shining examples of which parts of humanity we should strive to avoid emulating.

        • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.caEnglish
          34·
          2 days ago

          lmfao wow this is some real reddit shit. mass downvoting the guy who answered the question

          edit: oh wait it’s the same guy, it makes sense then. still, shouldn’t downvote the answer.

      • Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        289·
        2 days ago

        There should probably be a mechanic for users to boot overbearing mods, they are our communities, not for bootlicking fascists to play god because they “enforce the rules”

        • Bilb!@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          2 days ago

          There is one, it’s “start a different comm.” That’s the solution!

        • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
          510·
          2 days ago

          What do you think the Internet is?Humanity’s great, open exchange of information, where ideas can be shared with minimal gatekeeping, allowing knowledge, perspectives, and voices to circulate freely across borders and institutions?

          Pfft. Grow up, dude. It’s whatever the advertisers, billionaire shitheads, and power tripping moderators decide it should be, obviously.

          • Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            22·
            2 days ago

            No idea why you’re getting downvoted lol, maybe people don’t understand sarcasm

    • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.caEnglish
      15·
      2 days ago

      that’s a shitty rule tbh

      I get it, it makes it easier to moderate. still a shitty rule.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      2727·
      2 days ago

      I know you’re getting shit from everyone, but thanks for volunteering to mod and put up with all the “edgy” people here.

  • Lasherz@lemmy.worldM
    1813·
    1 day ago

    I think Jordan covered the rule existing and not to break it, but I’d like to discuss why it’s there to hopefully make this more transparent. Especially since Mitch may be croaking soon also (or already did, who knows?)

    Rule 6 is a necessary evil. The reason is that websites which are truly off the rails are often singled out. A mostly leftist forum would be even more likely to be targeted. Community mods should on occasion think what would these posts look like on an FBI filing, or on a hit piece on the DSA for example. Not the same morally, but famously many nationalist/racist sites have been targeted and then had their hosting or ddos protection revoked because of content on the site calling for death or celebrating it with their rules and enforcements having no such limitations.

    Different levels of extremes than here obviously, but the corporate landscape and justice dept is not on our side here and so interpretations which seem obvious to you may not be made before damage has been done.

    Above all, mods have a responsibility to not create problems for the site that hosts their coms, regardless of deserved or undeserved protection on someone’s legacy.

    Besides, it’s just as easy to say, “Warmonger Graham: Never an offensive war he didn’t support, never a dollar from Israel he didn’t immediately allow into his decision making process, never a brown person he didn’t want to kill. He has obtained what he wanted most for others, death. He can now start his final battle without his mortal coil, to start a regime change in hell.”

  • ruuster13@lemmy.zip
    149·
    2 days ago

    in February, he called himself the president’s “north star.”

    Shine on, Lindsey. Show him the way.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    31·
    2 days ago

    lindsay “Lady G” graham died having never been married and never having children. He ran for president once, when asked by press who his first lady would be, should he win, he replied, “My Sister…”.

    It is not an inherently wrong or shameful thing to be gay, by any means, but to live an entire lifetime poorly hiding your own truth while being dedicated to hating what you are publicly, in a position to vocally support and enact actual law aimed at making other humans fear, suffer and feel less for just loving who they love is unforgivable.

    His voting record who stand as a permanent indictment of a cruel person who led a short, hateful and frightened life - never taking a single free breath. A sad life, over.

  • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
    1131·
    2 days ago

    Actually this is massive, massive news. The republican primaries are already over in SC. Given his sudden death likely nobody was prepping a campaign (Graham was already running for re-election). They’re gonna have to have a special primary in just a few weeks, and only a few months to build and win a campaign.

    Huge huge opportunity for Dems.

  • btsax@reddthat.com
    50·
    2 days ago

    Here are some fun facts about South Carolina for those of you who have never been, unrelated to Lindsey Graham.

    Lindsey Graham is from a town called Central, which due to SC naming convention is in the northwest part of the state. Following the same convention there is also a town called North, South Carolina that is in the middle. Central also has a great Mexican restaurant called Pancho’s where you can go to celebrate any event you’d like

    In many parts of SC it is considered rude or unlucky to toss or throw beer on Sundays. This is because it is illegal to sell alcohol on Sundays in many places so if you toss a beer to your buddy at the campsite, for example, and they drop it, you can’t buy more till tomorrow. Please remember this tradition if you are having any celebrations on Sundays and want to honor South Carolina traditions.

    It’s customary in South Carolina to celebrate Bastille Day two days early. The reasons why are lost to history.

  • deft@lemmy.wtf
    17·
    2 days ago

    I’m not celebrating his death. I’m celebrating his lack of life, he was a closeted ruinous cruel little bigot with an ugly soul.🎉