politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The problem is that the left gets people cancelled for hate speech. The right gets people cancelled for objective truth. Read the comments that people are getting fired for. It's a blatant doouble standard that shifts the overton window on public discourse. Fascist bigots are running the country, and there's no room for compromise with hate.
Not a legal designation and legally protected as regular speech. Legal protections don't extend to private action, and opinions aren't truth.
Anyhow, firing public employees speaking as private citizens over public concerns violates 1ˢᵗ amendment rights to free speech under the Pickering test.
Nobody is "protected" from consequences of their speech. Free speech means we don't have laws prohibiting speaking. It doesn't mean you cannot be fired from your job, or people won't call you a douchebag.
I suggest you work on your reading as I wrote the same regarding private action.
I read what you wrote.
I completely agree with you on principle. My problem is that I don’t make “fuck you” money and whether we like it or not, seemingly half the country disagrees with our views. I can’t be starting fights and setting myself back over a YouTuber’s death.
Everyone doing this sort of thing is sure that he's the one speaking objective truth while his enemies are evil and destroying the country. The sight of so many people on the other side equally sure that they're actually the ones speaking the objective truth ought to cause some self-doubt but it seldom does.
There really are people out there who are evil and people who are destroying the country (not necessarily the same people) but we either have rules for everyone or rules for no one. "Rules for them but not for me, since I'm speaking objective truth" is, in effect, rules for no one.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't look for objective truth, but rather that the behavior of someone who thinks he's probably right and the behavior of someone who thinks he's definitely right are going to be quite different, and that we would all (probably) be better off if cultural norms favored the former sort of behavior rather than the latter.
Norms according to which it is ok for one side to attack the other in some way but it is not ok for the other side to respond in the same way (because the first side considers itself objectively correct) only work when the balance of power between the two sides is so uneven that it would often be called oppression. The desire to oppress others is a part of the human condition that everyone ought to be alert for in themselves - being on the left does not mean being immune. However, even those on the left who are in no mood for tolerance currently don't have the power to win the fight their way - if tolerance doesn't win then the right will win.
I should clarify what I mean by tolerance. I'm talking about the ability to co-exist peacefully even with the people that one hates. If this sort of tolerance breaks down, then the left is at a large disadvantage in the conflict that would follow - the right is generally more unified, better at violence, and in control of the federal government.
Bull, and I cannot stress this enough, crap. Conservative ideology eschews objective truth in favor of beneficial positions every fucking time.