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
And here we go, a disagreement over policy balloons instantly into "racism and xenophobia" and an ally gets kicked out of the meeting because everything is black or white and no compromise is possible.
I find DEI policies to be a complicated topic, personally. I don't oppose the basic idea and motive behind them, but I think they've been implemented poorly and often turn into discrimination in their own right. Am I now classed as "Trump supporter" in your eyes? I've been called a Trump supporter because I don't like the recent Star Wars movies, so I'm sure a lot of people would indeed lump me in with him on that basis. And thus is proven the basic point about how Trump's opponents are destroying themselves without Trump's supporters having to lift a finger.
Oh, so you're saying you personally don't like DEI policies. In that case I'm not necessarily calling you racist and xenophobic, but your seeming willingness to accept the results of past racism and xenophobia is definitely concerning. If I was running the meeting you wouldn't get kicked out, but your "can we not include DEI in our platform" would be met with an uncompromising "no." Before I explain why, do you understand the concepts of systemic racism and generational wealth?
You need such "discrimination" to undo the results of past discrimination. For example, did you know that despite being only ~0.7% of the population, Native Americans make up about 24% of the poverty population of the US? Is this not injustice? How do you rectify it without affirmative action (aka DEI)?
You're really, really intent on driving my point home here, aren't you?
I oppose Trump. I think he's the worst president the US has ever had and he needs to be stopped. But I expressed an unrelated view that is mildly in opposition to yours, and now that's the only thing you can think about. You're focusing entirely on attacking me on this issue.
Have you forgotten that this is about Trump, and about how the only way to defeat him is to get over these sorts of divisions and diversions?
To you this is about Trump. To others it's about the injustice they have suffered their whole lives that got worse under Trump but did not originate with him. Being able to laser-focus on Trump is a privilege; it assumes that the politically relevant parts of your experience before Trump were if not good then at least tolerable. This is not the case for a massive chunk of the population. I mean, hell, for example ICE kidnappings are nothing new; Trump is just performatively cruel about them. You can't take a stand against some injustice and expect the people experiencing the chunk you're letting go to help you. As a wise man once said:
Yes, we get it, you don't want any allies in your fight against Trump that aren't perfectly aligned with every part of your fight against Trump. You don't need to keep on driving it home now, you've amply demonstrated why Democrats just can't seem to get it together to oppose him.
The Democrats? Seriously? These Democrats? Sigh.
Yes, the party that is literally the only party that can possibly remove Trump due to America's two-party system. That party.
You don't support them removing Trump? Then you're fine with Trump. That's the reality of the situation, and your insistence that only some magical fairyland third party that happens to align perfectly with your ideals must be allowed to do it is - as I have repeatedly said - exactly the problem that this thread is about.
You really can stop illustrating it now, we all get it.
I honestly don't think dei did shit one way or another and was all just a show. That being said I agree. Lets all get behind the constitution including all the bill of rights and argue about the other things once we have enough rights to do so in a civilized manner.
"We need to get my rights now. Your rights can come after we can argue about them in a civilized manner." Setting aside the moral duplicity of this, it's just not how you build a coalition. For them to fight for your rights, you need to fight for theirs with equal commitment.
So seperation of powers, the bill of rights including speech, assembly, due process, etc. Those are just rights for one person to you? The point is if we can't express views and assemble or get a day in court then everything else is in the toilet. You need to get a clue.
These are rights for people who are economically well-off enough to exercise them. You don't, in fact, have the right to due process if you can't afford to miss work to exercise that right, and you don't have the right to speech if your three jobs don't leave you enough time to exercise that right. And you don't have any of these rights if you're being enslaved (and yes, it is slavery) by a for-profit prison. Constitutional political rights on their own are woefully insufficient to address the problems of minorities in America, and as they have repeatedly experienced, "later" more often than not is a synonym for "never." Point being: If you have no answer for systemic discrimination in your program, then yes you're not defending the rights of minorities experiencing that discrimination. The right of a black person to not be killed by the police is as or more important than your right to complain about the government.
Agreed. No war but Class war. Identity Politics is a privileged distraction. A game of oppression olympics always undermining social good.
This is a ridiculous stretch. This is exactly the path towards finding out what a real lack of rights are. This is the same all or nothing fallacious reasoning I see all the time online. I mean look what you said "If you have no answer for systemic discrimination in your program" now name a program that exists that 100% definitely has nothing that could be called systemic discrimination.
Because the current and ongoing abuses of US minorities aren't real, right? You're really outing yourself here.
There it is, folks, the all or nothing fallacious reasoning.
Yes. That is what im pointing out. Your reasoning cannot be assailed unless we are in a perfect state. You 100% caught the fallacy I was explaining. You resoning is minorities exist and I may not be one so im wrong. Im glad you get it because I will be honest its rare that happens when in an exchange with someone using your arguments.
I have no idea what you're trying to say.
This comment chain is just chef's kiss
At best I was expecting a few "huh, yeah, that's a common pattern" responses.
This heap of "you're racist! Get out!" Rage I got instead illustrated my point better than I could have hoped for. Unfortunately. What a complete lack of self-awareness.
I wonder if anyone would change their mind if I "recanted" and started gushing about how I loved everything about how things were being handled on the left with no reservations or caveats? Or if, once branded an enemy, always an enemy?
In any event not a promising sign for future efforts to take Trump down. Probably for the best I'm not American, I'll just focus on staying out of the splash zone.
I'm holding out hope that the real world remains separate from social media. We shall see. And for the Americans in the audience, remember No Kings Oct 18!