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
The Atlantic caters to the wealthy and powerful, so they're likely trying to shape elite opinion with the potential to influence the Supreme Court.
it would be nice if it had that effect, but it’s been 3 years since jan 6 and much has been said in that time (by the atlantic and others). january 6 has been such a central point of american politics for so many years, and it’s been such a polarizing thing that i doubt there are many people left who are still on the fence about it.
i think this article is way more effective at reinforcing the idea that we can debate our way out of january 6th, than it is at actually debating our way out of january 6th.
i’m not convinced by this either. at the center of current american politics, there are fundamental disagreements about what “the truth” is, and how to know what “is true”. this is what’s behind trumps “fake news” and his revisionist history. it’s not the case that the public is unanimously interested in knowing what’s true, or that they believe the atlantic will tell them the truth.
again, this article is dancing around the core problems in current american politics. i don’t think these problems can be solved by simply presenting new information or trying to debate the other side.
there is still value in spreading this information, but it should come with an acknowledgement of the deeper underlying problems.