I think similar mechanisms are at work there as well, though to a lesser extent: I think there’s hardly any country in the world where nationalism is as pronounced as it is in the U.S.

On the one hand, this has to do with cultural dominance, which is reflected, for example, in the global popularity of the U.S. entertainment industry and so on. On the other hand, however, it also has to do with the fact that the US has been placing nationalism at the center of its culture for decades, ranging from the pledge of allegiance in schools to the targeted promotion of sporting events, where not only are flags waved, but the desired, ruthless competitive mentality - which is essential to unbridled capitalism - is directly manifested in mass events with a participatory character. There are countless examples of how the image of the superior, righteous nation has been massively propagated over decades.

This illusion is now beginning to crumble, however, because unlike its predecessors, the current U.S. regime does not care about maintaining a respectable facade, which actually does not strike me as particularly clever: Apparently, these people are solely concerned with maximizing their own enrichment, even if it means risking the collapse of the entire system.

The reason for this seems simple to me: Even their first, rather pathetic coup attempt went unpunished - they therefore assume they can do whatever they please without being held accountable. And they seem to be right in this assessment: Millions of people do take to the streets on particular days, as they did just yesterday, but this has no serious consequences for the regime, especially since they largely control the media, so that despite the scope of the protests, there is hardly any reporting on these mass demonstrations.

And this is likely the crux of the matter: because public discourse takes place in the media, yet the media is controlled by the very same people on whose behalf the corrupt regime acts, many citizens still seem unaware of the extent of the misery in which the country finds itself.

Coupled with the fact that the U.S. has always heavily cultivated national pride, many citizens likely assume that things will sort themselves out as usual: Despite obvious corruption, they continue to trust the legal system, hope for the midterms, and believe that everything will get better again with the Democrats, and so on. In any case, a majority of U.S. citizens seem to assess the situation as such that it is not yet necessary to put their own comfortable way of life at risk, although this appears to be changing somewhat. If I understand correctly, there are now apparently efforts to organize a general strike, which seems to me to be the only peaceful means of forcing the regime to step down and, maybe, even pushing through long-overdue fundamental reforms.

Whether this will work, however, seems rather unlikely to me. I see it - also from the outside - exactly the same way you do: It also seems to me that the majority of U.S. citizens underestimate the gravity of the situation, or at least that they do not want to admit that their system has been so thoroughly infiltrated that it is beyond salvation - at least if the living conditions of citizens are ever to improve significantly.

As I said, I see the reason for this in a combination of self-deception and the fact that the media are controlled to an extreme degree by oligarchs.

I think it’s fair to say that, on the whole, many U.S. citizens haven’t woken up from the “American Dream,” even though it’s been an absolute nightmare for quite some time now.

I suppose many people don’t even want to wake up, because then they’d have to take charge of shaping their own day.

Yes, it’s really quite strange - especially in its extremest form among MAGA supporters: This “movement” clearly has much more in common with a cult than with a rational, political organization. I don’t necessarily think that the vast majority of people who feel they belong realize what they’re being used for. It’s interesting from a mass psychology perspective, but unfortunately disastrous for the US as well as for the entire world.

In a way, but then again, not really, because to feel shame, one must first acknowledge that one is responsible for something reprehensible. It seems to me rather that it is precisely the acceptance of responsibility for the collective actions of the US - which are, after all, manifested in the actions of elected representatives - that is being prevented by ignoring reality. It seems to be more of a defense mechanism to protect one’s own, believed-to-be-secure identity from collapse by fleeing from reality.

In this sense, it strikes me more as something like willful blindness, deliberate ignorance, or cognitive dissonance reduction - as psychologists would say. So some kind of self-deception designed to allow one to continue clinging to one’s established self-image, even when one is aware that it does not correspond to reality.

Shame, on the other hand, would be the next step - one would only feel that once they have realized that they have lived a lie for half their life.

I suspect this is because the U.S.’s ruthless actions contradict the country’s self-image, which has been cemented by decades of propaganda: the narrative that the U.S. is the good guy, spreading freedom and democracy wherever it intervenes, the proud nation that protects the world and punishes dictators for their cruelty - all that bogus.

Reality simply doesn’t fit this propagandistic narrative: after all, in violation of international law, the U.S. is waging a war of aggression alongside genocidal mass murders and committing the most heinous war crimes in the process - crimes so repugnant that they immediately expose the fairy tales of the freedom-loving, friendly world police as obvious lies.

So I consider this to be denial of reality. People simply prefer to live in a flattering lie rather than face reality: for many, their misguided pride in their nation is apparently so important that they refuse to acknowledge that there is absolutely nothing to be proud of anymore - on the contrary, they should be ashamed of their country, but they simply won’t accept that, which is why they prefer to close their eyes to reality.

The US has never recognized the ICC - for precisely this reason: anyone who commits war crimes themselves naturally does not want to be prosecuted for them.

Will that cost another jumbo jet, or is that already covered by the one from Qatar?

Good for the victims. Still, it’s just so typical of the U.S. that you can always just buy your way out of responsibility if you’re rich enough.

Well, the logical consequence is precisely the situation this absurd country finds itself in today: justice simply no longer exists, and the country is openly ruled by organized crime.

The only surprising thing about this is that the citizens have apparently come to terms with it.

Well, they make a lot of money through corruption. So they have to put their ethics on the back burner sometimes. You have to understand that - they’re just trying to line their pockets as much as possible. Where would we end up if limits were placed on greed? Unthinkable!

Yes, that’s another word that comes to mind.

It would be for the good of the world if all nations could agree that blatant breaches of contract will not be tolerated - and certainly not blackmail. That is precisely what organized crime, which now openly rules the U.S., means by “the art of the deal” - and “no deal” would be the logical response to that.

There’s a word for that: corruption

I think this issue is exactly the same as many others that are, in principle, supported by an overwhelming majority: it is the influence of lobbying that makes it possible for the will of the people to be ignored. While this phrase is widely used, it doesn’t quite capture the essence of the matter - it is simply corruption.

Yes, that much is certain, but it’s not at all certain whether there will be a “way out” like you imagine. The reason: If this “administration” were to leave office, everyone involved would likely face prosecution, even in a system as corrupt as that of the U.S.

They won’t risk that, especially since their first coup attempt last time went unpunished. Now the orange despot has ICE, a secret police force whose budget far exceeds that of all other federal agencies combined—such as the FBI, CIA, etc. There can only be one reason for this, and that is the establishment of a true autocracy with all the constraints that come with it. I am now convinced that the sham democracy the U.S. has been for decades has come to an end.

I simply cannot understand how American citizens fail to see this, why they still cling to the idea that the U.S. is a country governed by the rule of law—it isn’t; it hasn’t been for a long time.

Edit: I’m from Germany and we have a history with that kind of thing.

I have no idea how you can still believe there’s even the slightest chance that the U.S. justice system would deliver justice.

It’s really remarkable how blatantly corrupt a government can be. Well, not really, because it’s just the logical consequence of the fact that even the most serious crimes go unpunished in the U.S.

What’s almost funny is that so many U.S. citizens still insist they live in a country governed by the rule of law. I have no idea how they can still believe that, given what happens there every single day.

But then it’s not funny anymore, because the consequences for the whole world are so dire.

Printer cartridges and razor blades

Yeah, that’s true: Stephen Hillenburg, the creator of SpongeBob, and his team certainly had some socially critical intent when they created the show and its characters - after all, there are often deliberately exaggerated everyday situations and the like which address social issues in a humorous way.

But also yeah, exactly: I added /s because, while the underlying message is at least somewhat recognizable, I presented it in such a pretentious way. I was just lazing around in bed and thought I’d have a little fun with some kind of pseudo-intellectual silliness.

So /s - mainly so no one here thinks I’m some completely out-of-touch political theorist or something who actually takes this exaggerated view all too seriously :)

Mr. Krabs’s relentless emphasis on profit -expressed through wage suppression, obsessive cost-cutting, and the conversion of social relations into transactions - renders him a concentrated embodiment of profit-driven logic. SpongeBob’s boundless cheerfulness and dutiful labor on the other hand present the idealized worker who performs emotional compliance as part of his job; his behavior makes visible the moral contradiction at the heart of an economy that prizes surplus extraction over workers’ wellbeing. The Krusty Krab’s daily rhythms - timed shifts, commodified leisure, scripted upselling, and constant attention to margins - show how extraction becomes normalized through routine rather than force.

The rivalry between Mr. Krabs and Sheldon J. Plankton further highlights the system’s subtly coercive nature: their ceaseless competition is less about innovation than about maintaining status atop the same extractive order, a ruthless free market theater in which two capitalists conserve and contest power while workers absorb the costs. The comedy works because it literalizes these dynamics - affection as account entry, friendship as transaction - so that the satirical clarity of the show forces viewers, even while amused, to recognize how profit as an organizing principle reshapes everyday life and renders cheerfulness itself a technique of compliance.

/s

It would be great if that were the case, but unfortunately, I’m afraid it won’t last long. Gun lobbyists are already scrambling to strike deals that will sooner or later sway corrupt politicians. The fact that Western countries have still not imposed any sanctions - neither against the U.S. for its blatant violation of international law, nor against Israel for the same offense and, additionally, genocide - shows that this is a thoroughly realistic assessment.

Thanks, that’s a shame to hear. I’d read about his case some time ago, but now that he’s so openly siding with those responsible for precisely this kind of ridiculous abuse of the legal system, I’ve immediately lost interest - it’s inexcusable to me, because I firmly reject everything this criminal regime stands for. Besides, as I said: calling Afroman a musician would really be an exaggeration - no matter what standard you apply.