741
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
741 points (92.8% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2645 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ok so. I like the concept, it's a good way to move.
HOWEVER there is one big problem. We can't use this emotionally inflammatory rhetoric, because it's what the right thrives on. You can quote me on this later, but i guarantee you if the right sees this they will call it "sexual eugenics" or something stupid.
literally all you have to do to make this a fully marketable and unbeatable position is to treat it like econ 101. Social interaction is most often based on simple contractual obligations. Those in question here, have failed, and thus, it is no longer contractually valid.
"the market for sex is simply untenable culturally, and in terms of healthcare, completely fucked. I no longer plan on having casual sex anytime soon" and suddenly it's like 50x more reasonable and palatable than the previous statement.
and before anybody tells me "oh well it's good for attention and marketing" yeah, if you want to spread the entirely wrong message. just look at the bear vs man debacle that happened a while ago.
~~although you have to be careful because the right will probably just tell you that this is the point, at least the religious part of it, in which case being inflammatory isn't going to do shit anyway. Tough times we live in now, i guess.~~
Americans value the speed and simplicity of a message over accuracy or nuance.
Both parties used that to their advantage to post out of context clips, something that I would consider manipulative at best.
idiots who do not prefer the accuracy of transmission* FTFY
i really wish more people would do literally anything to not get got by this low level bullshit lmao. It's so silly that people care so much about problems, but so little about information sources, or accuracy, or even factual nature.
People who are in an excited emotional state just aren't going to do well thinking that stuff through.
I'm not immune to it either, I just dont have tiktok or facebook at all to avoid it.
i suppose so, but it literally only takes one "is this actually true?" to check to see if it's true. If people are as "skeptical" as they claim to be about mainstream media, i fail to see how they don't understand that google exists and is useful in the 21st century. Though to be fair, it's harder to use now.
I'm definitely not immune to it either, but i operate on a strictly factual basis, so it's really hard for me to get caught up in propaganda.
Nobody operates on facts alone. Unless you were there when it happened, you have to trust a source to some degree.
Quite a lot of people just say fuck it, if its all varying degrees of shit, I'm not going to listen to any of it.
Thats how word of mouth type stuff ends up on fox news, because even they know a lot of right wing Americans wont trust professional news stories over their neighbors anecdotes.
We might think we use better sources, and check into things more vigorously, but our conclusions still require faith as much as any republicans beliefs.
We still haven't even figured out how to refute religion conclusively, for example. Juries still out on whether religion is fantasy or actual reality, whether we think thats ridiculous or not.
The right will make up its own inflammatory fantasies if there are none, just like it makes up stories about immigrants eating pets. It happens either way. Stop letting them control your strategies, it's EXTREMELY UNWISE.
yeah but the problem here is twofold, if we do it ourselves, they will accuse us of being what they say we are. If we do not, they will make up their own, and pretend like it's happening.
It's the anti fascist problem. If you're anti fascist, you're just fascist against fascism. There is no way to combat fascism without more fascism.
There isn't a good solution here, unfortunately.
Stop being defined by fascists.
you sort of inherently have to define yourself under fascism, in a system with fascists, otherwise you are under control of the fascists. Because they can do your game better than you can, because they started first. So you really don't have many options other than holding either, the power, or the intellectual upperhand, which isn't even a guarantee either. Since again, reality doesn't matter to fascists.
When you let them define you, that is already control. This isn't about "reality", it's about social control.
If they tell you that "only bad people demand higher wages" and you accept their definition of bad people, we have a problem.