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 politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.
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
you honestly think people turn to communism because they want to become billionaires themself?
I don't understand how that's a reply to what you replied to. Did you reply to the right comment?
to me "you can't have communism and billionaires" in reply to "you cant have both democracy and billionaires" sounds more like "but what if i was the billionaire?" than "and thats the way it should be!"
hence my comment.
You’re an idiot if you think that’s what I said.
now that you got that out of your system, perhaps you could think about the topic and explain what you meant to actually say instead of calling us names?
we'll wait.
please take your time, don't rush it. we know coming up with an actual argument is hard.
Nah. You can’t comprehend basic English.
--Robert A. Heinlein, Take Back Your Government
Heinlein had some ideas, but never consistent ideas.
Starship Troopers was sort of a love letter to fascism, and also the idea of power armor. Most of that book is gushing over how cool power armor could be.
Stranger in a Strange Land was rather anti-authoritarian, but there were some hints at something darker in a few places.
Time Enough for Love is time travel incest porn.
And all of Heinlein's ranting about Communism, which in his day was mostly Leninism.
Take Back Your Government is a nonfiction book about how and why to get involved in politics, primarily at a volunteer level. Lots of it is a historical artifact about how political campaigns worked in the 1940s, but it's also got some great glimpses into Heinlein's ideas about governance and one's individual responsibility to get informed and involved.
Some of my favorite bits:
...and...
...and...
i agree, national socialism is not the way.
long live international solidarity.
Drop the national part. Socialism has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in the 20th and 21st centuries.
did you somehow read my comment as condoning the national part? if so, please explain how you came to that conclusion or simply do everyone a favour and re-read what it says
Your comment is talking about national socialism in response to a different comment talking about individual American communists, right?
I gotta say, I don’t really see the connection you made, either.
heinlein was opposed to communism and flirted with fascist ideas, coming to the conclusion that when he was talking about communism it was most likely some form of nationalized subtype isnt that far off. hence the ending
National socialism is not just left wing nationalism, which probably covers most nationalized subtypes of communism though, it’s Nazism, which is fascist and far right, not at all left.
Holy shit, I didn't even think of the possibility that this person didn't realize National Socialist = Nazi.
In a fucking politics board, no less.
I don’t think it’s likely, but there’s always a chance.
Fair enough, I wait with bated breath for their reply, lol.
and what makes you think i dont know that?
my point is: if he disliked communism, but flirted with fascism, perhaps he was never really talking about international communism at all but only ever conceived of the notion of a nationally limited socialism. or nazism if you like, but needless contractions of words wont get you anywhere closer to understanding what i am talking about if all you can think about is "gotcha"
I don’t know what you know without you communicating it to me.
That’s a perfectly clear statement that I would have had no trouble following the first time.
No, those aren’t the same, so now I’m lost again
It’s not a needless contraction if you’re trying to talk about two different ideologies under one name- it helps to distinguish two very different ideologies. It’s not a gotcha to ask for clarification. You’re taking an attempt to understand as an attack.
to you, a nationally limited socialism is not equal to nazism, to me the distinction is negligible. if you think we (as in all humans) are not the same, then we truly are not.
read the thread with a sober mind and point to one person other than wpb that didnt call me names or made an effort to project their opinions on my comments but rather asked what i was talking about. all in all i am left with the impression that this community seems to prefer calling names over having civilized discussions
i kept giving you the benefit of the doubt, but watching you cheer with your peers over how "this person seemingly doesnt know the difference between such distinctive ideologies" ... yeah no, i dont think i want to talk to you (plural) anymore. you (singular), kept it relatively civil, so i wish you (+wpb) a nice day.
and a whole day of 100% packet loss for the rest :3
You sound fucking insufferable, do you know that?
Both of our comments were pretty straight forward. You seem confused.
confusion is one thing, replying "drop the national part" to "national socialism is not the way" is another.
have a nice day :3
Yeah, they are definitely two different things.
You as well ✌️