this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2025
1386 points (98.9% liked)

Political Memes

9945 readers
393 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Rhyfel@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Well if anyone is tired of posting about it and wants to do something about it message me

[–] Bgugi@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Absolutely incandescent!

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago

"Do you agree?!?" Lol. Yes I actually do but this has some real bot energy which makes it feel a bit weird. Like this post isn't actually genuine and even though I agree with it, it only exists to try and get dissenters in so people will argue and become more divided. Feels icky like a reddit post

[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Okay, you've identified a problem. What is your solution?

[–] melfie@lemy.lol 1 points 3 weeks ago

Sortition sounds like an interesting idea (TL;DR - make congress work more like a jury where randomly selected citizens make the laws instead of career politicians):

https://harvardpolitics.com/sortition-in-america/

The way the question is worded they are in the process of gaining agreement. Trying to address an issue with others when you haven't gained agreement on the actual problem ends up taking longer with more of a mess and things getting pushed in every direction with some people not knowing if it has already been accomplished. Say Terry thinks the problems is solved when you oust the Tyrant, Jerry thinks the problem is over when you get the supreme Court balanced, and Barry thinks the problem is solved when we stop having federal troops deployed in cities. Jerry, Terry, and Barry all think they are working together, but are all pushing in different directions and ultimately will achieve none of the goals described by poster. Getting them all to agree on a problem, makes it clearer to know when the goal has been completed. (Hopefully). Granted soon as you start to implement anything, shit is going to hit the fan anyways, because the easiest way to power is by tearing down others, not building others up.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The president only enforces rights, or not. Congress changes rights.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] daannii@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

We need amendments to restrict the power over civil rights. Essentially no civil rights law can be removed or superseded by additional laws. And that no laws can be passed to allow exception to this law.

Also we need clear penalties for failing to follow laws. Not just for presidents but any members of any level of political seats. Specific infraction and penalties.

A 3 strike policy. 3 such acts and removal of office followed by a new election in 6 months or a year.

Also laws against aipac and corporate money in politics. Banned. Permanently. No exceptions. No ability to change laws to change this either.

We keep learning that when we don't have strict laws and strict guidelines for insuring those laws are followed, bad actors will (always) take advantage. And the laws are useless unless they are enforced in an unbiased way.

Also Congress members for states cannot override voted on laws. The people supercede the elected officials whims.

We also need ways to remove people from office during their term.

[–] Narauko@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

The problem with being unable to change or supercede laws is the hubris to assume the laws passed are perfect for all time. We have all of human history to prove we are not the peak of civilization.

Getting bribery out of politics by removing lobbying and campaign finance is probably the best thing we can do. Having every politician run with the same amount of money and banning retired politicians from working as lobbiests or board members after office would do the most for eliminating corruption.

Even if you make laws unrepealable or changable, if the government won't enforce it then it solves nothing. We have no higher entity to complain to and get enforcement or satisfaction. And if there is some higher entity empowered and capable, we then put all trust that whatever is enforcing law can never be corrupted or coerced or have its own adjenda.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›