Focus and determination can grant you the power of the queen on the chessboard.

But when you become blind to what happens around you, you become the pawn in someone else’s plan. A messenger is an authority’s favorite tool.

Someone would like to starve people and you are a part of their plan. If you feel the tug of appeal, it is because you understand something isn’t right here. If you don’t investigate, your mind is not your own.

> My contention is that this kind of emotional appeal has been exploited to the point of (quickly) diminishing returns.

That might apply to you personally, and if it does then it says a lot more about you than it does any broader societal point.

Personally, I’m able to distinguish between attempts to manipulate my emotions and the very real, very true fact that people are starving and dying as a result of cynical choices made by Musk and DOGE. There’s no reason to group that together with war mongering and money laundering, the only reason to do so is if you’re seeking to dismiss real documented suffering.

“People have cynically tried to manipulate my emotions so I don’t have any emotions any more” isn’t the retort you apparently think it is.

> this kind of emotional appeal

It is not an emotional appeal. It is a statement of objective and provable fact that cutting off funding for food resulted in people not having food. It's also obvious that this would be the result. The grandparent posted a link to one study. There are others if you do a quick search.

> People are scratching the surface and following the money. Those who used such maudlin tactics to protect money laundering, war mongering and such things would do well to go and sin no more, lest more serious consequences come knocking.

I have no idea what any of this even means. I don't live in whatever bubble you do, but it sounds like you believe there is some kind of global cabal of "them" that profited by these children not starving and you're out to stop that?

I think specifically these NGOs were run by board members that ran 10 other NGOs all called "Save the children Africa" etc... And the weird thing about it, is that no children were actually being saved. Instead the money went to ActBlue through a few actors.

Mr Beast has done more for Saving the Children in Africa with $5m than USAID has done with $500b per year.

Is it untrue? You failed to address my point.

Children are being left to die. SOMETHING is more important than that to the proponents of these policies. What is it? If it's lower taxes... they aren't achieving that goal. Taxes are only decreasing for the top 0.1% of the population and tip earners.

If it's to lower the national debt that also isn't working. The national debt has increased at record rates.

Is there some other goal I'm not aware of? Why is it so important that these children not be fed?