• FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      You know how in Skyrim if a guard catches you breaking the law, you can just give him gold and he’ll fuck off and let you keep stealing?

      It’s lawful like that.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        So in other words, neutral evil. He’ll exploit the law to further his selfish goals like the rest of them, but he also has zero hesitation to ignore the law when that suits him better, which precludes any “lawful” alignment.

        • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The propensity to prioritize self over many many others when it would not be any real loss to do so other than a line on a graph…that tips it from neutral into full (technically) lawful evil IMO, but severe moral evil. If you could do good but enrich yourself at someone else’s expense instead, that’s premeditation and a qualifier for crimes just sayin

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’m not sure that you’re following what I’m trying to say.

            On the “the law is very important” to “it’s very important to oppose the law” scale, his sometimes but not always illegal ways of enriching himself puts him somewhere in the middle and the fact that he literally doesn’t care whether it’s legal or illegal as long as it even POTENTIALLY benefits him or just the perception of him puts a line under that.

            But yeah, we’re agreed that he’s extremely far to the malevolent/selfish end of the benevolent/kind to malevolent/selfish scale.

      • NAM@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Chaotic feels more appropriate, since they’re only really predictable if you try and think of the absolute dumbest possible thing they could say or do at any given moment.

  • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hey. Trump probably isn’t really a billionaire and has managed to get charged for crimes even though his former job made him legally above the law. I don’t think lawful evil is the correct alignment.

    • paholg@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      1 year ago

      He’s definitely not lawful, but I’m also not sure he belongs on a billionaire chart.

    • Sporrik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lawful != Following the law of the land Lawful means your justification for your actions is within the bounds of a strict personal code or creed.

      • root_beer@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, and Trump doesn’t seem to have one of those either. But I chalk that up to the brain worms more than anything else.

    • Malgas@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Obligatory: ‘lawful’ alignment doesn’t necessarily entail not committing crimes, only adherence to some sort of code.

      But yes, Trump doesn’t do that, either.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 year ago

    Actually, I’m pretty sure Trump, being the eternal narcissist who thinks of himself being above the rules as a given, would be Neutral Evil. He wants to assert his selfish will on society IN SPITE OF the law as often as by USING the law.

    The others are accurate, though.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah, I’m pretty sure that he’s still lawful evil. Just because the rules are getting more nonsensical and arbitrary doesn’t mean that he’s no longer committing evil using rules and regulations like a true lawful evil villain.

        I don’t know if you’re one of them, but a lot of people think that chaotic evil is inherently more evil than neutral or lawful evil. It’s not. It’s just a different flavor of malevolence 🤷

        • DessertStorms@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just because the rules are getting more nonsensical and arbitrary doesn’t mean that he’s no longer committing evil using rules and regulations like a true lawful evil villain.

          This right here, plus the massive influence they have on creating laws (or making sure some never get passed) in the first place.

        • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The deluge of court cases against him, ranging from wage theft and lying to the market, to releasing an alpha level self driving car on the streets, show he doesn’t give a fuck about the laws - some of his edgelord reactions even indicate he has a pathological contempt for the law.

    • BigNote@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      And that’s leaving aside the fact that he’s not actually a billionaire.

    • DessertStorms@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Lmfao, this one man is hoarding enough money to solve world hunger 10 times over, and enough influence to change the entire way the world is run, but what he wants (and I know this because of his actions) is to never drop out of the top 5 richest people on the planet list.

      And he has you not only convinced that he gives a shit about anyone but himself, but so much so that you are willing to publicly lick his boot.

      Good to see the PR is serving its purpose I guess…

    • 31337@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago
      1. He made that money by stealing the surplus value of other people’s labor, which probably would’ve done much more good in the hands of the workers instead of being hoarded, as much of it is now.

      2. His business practices harmed consumers.

      3. His meddling in education has caused much harm.

      4. He met with Epstein many times, and probably committed statutory rape.

    • paholg@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      Were he not evil, he never would have become a billionaire in the first place.

    • Jumuta@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Extend, Embrace, Extinguish

      he is literally one of the most deplorable people known to man and is the literal definition of a capitalist. Whitewashing, propaganda, proprietisation, he does all and everything detrimental to society

    • darcy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      looks like someone fell for the propaganda. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GOOD BILLIONAIRE. which charity does he mainly donate to again? oh yeah, the one which his family controls. he has painted himself as a genuinely good person. idc how much he pledges to donate when he dies, if he still has the money now, he is evil.

    • zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      The dude single handily fucked the American education system by mainstreaming voucher schools. His “gifts to education” was a poison pill and that really does sum up the entirety of billionaire philanthropy.

    • Serdan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      If being a billionaire is inherently deplorable, why are you defending one?

    • WabiSabiPapi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      imagine a society not dependent on individual charity (with wealth expropriated from the working class) for improving material wellbeing.

      does a ‘nice’ king justify monarchy?

  • chellewalker@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    Does “Lawful” apply here when they’re buying politicians to change those laws for them?

    • nfh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lawful doesn’t necessarily mean following the laws of a state, but adherence to order and hierarchy. Buying politicians to bureaucratically stack the deck in one’s favor is compatible with lawful evil, for someone upholding a hierarchy in which they’re (supposed to be) on top.

      If it’s more driven by greed than ideology, it’s probably more neutral evil.

      • meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah. Some of those rat fucks are straight chaotic evil. Lawful usually means they have a consistent set of ideals they follow. Rules they won’t break and such. Some, like Trump and musk, would gladly break any rule they’ve previously set to get just a bit further ahead than others.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Might be switching Trump to unlawful evil in a few months here.also might be dropping him from the list entirely