this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2023
441 points (83.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
5519 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yesman@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago (3 children)

As with Napoleon, who spoke of the glory of France but whose narrow ambitions for himself and his family brought France to ruin, Trump’s ambitions, though he speaks of making America great again, clearly begin and end with himself.

As the author keeps comparing Trump to Napoleon and Hitler, I can't help but wonder if maybe the US is due a conflagration. At what point do we admit that the American experiment returned a null result?

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago (2 children)

In the cases of France and Germany, the answer was violence. Oppression has never been defeated with pacifism. If history is our guide and conservatives are our oppressors, soon we may have to make some very difficult life and death decisions.

Conservatives have already embraced violence as part of their ideology, which I think makes the path out of their oppression more clear.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 2 points 9 months ago

the choice of weather there will be violence isn't ours to make, the conservatives have made it for us, and they chose violence. our choice is to resist or concede to fascism. conceding won't make the violence stop, it will only make it worse and don't let anyone convince you otherwise

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Oppression has never been defeated with pacifism.

I was taught that Gandhi helped India defeat the oppression of the British Raj with pacifism.

Is that not the case? I mean I wouldn't be surprised if Power taught me peaceful protest works every time.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

as Orwell stated:

"As an ex-Indian civil servant, it always makes me shout with laughter to hear, for instance, Gandhi named as an example of the success of non-violence. As long as twenty years ago it was cynically admitted in Anglo-Indian circles that Gandhi was very useful to the British government. So he will be to the Japanese if they get there. Despotic governments can stand ‘moral force’ till the cows come home; what they fear is physical force."

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Pretty sure two devastating world wars were a major factor.

[–] neurogenesis@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I was taught that Gandhi helped India defeat the oppression of the British Raj with pacifism. Is that not the case?

You couldn't have Martin without Malcom and you couldn't have Ghandi without Ghadar.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

it was a lie, of course.

[–] Lomeshag@lemmy.ca 16 points 11 months ago

I think it's more that human societies are very rarely stable across 3 or more generations. The US has had a number of major crises through its history, it's definitely due for another. Repeating the dead line about a failed experiment is kind of needlessly deaf to that history.

All you can do for now is stand up and fight it.

[–] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

At what point do we admit that the American experiment returned a null result?

Probably when the commerce clause meant the fed can regulate shit you do in your home with your own body.

But even failed experiments give data. I'm a fan of the bill of rights, save for a few niggling details.