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
This narrative serves the capitalist class and cannot be proven. You don't "fix" voters, you create solidarity by dealing with their material conditions (engage in mutual aid).
Solidarity is great. And I I'm all for it. But how do you have solidarity with a group of people that cannot even agree on what constitutes reality. How do you address the material conditions of people who reject addressing the material conditions if it also helps someone who isn't them.
The answer is you cannot. Not until critical thinking skills Etc are addressed. As long as people are blindly ideological of any stripe. There can't be solidarity
I think the sort of help you're talking about is of political policy (ie free lunches at schools). I am speaking of direct action by volunteers (ie running a community pantry). When you engage in the community, conversations happen and that is when you can challenge biases in a non-confrontational setting.
If you cannot find solidarity in the masses then what is it you're looking for? A Vanguard party to reeducate the masses?
No not specifically. Again many of these people deny community with those they disagree with because of ideology. Though as someone pragmatically anarcho communist I do agree it is the better method. Working in communities.
The problem is how does one effectively address attacks facilitated through government? Is education reeducation? We're not talking about instilling any sort of ideology. I despise ideology generally. Vanguard parties specifically. We are talking about basic critical thinking skills. Checking and verifying sources. Not just blindly believing what others tell you.
Those of us who are terminally online should definitely checking sources, but I don't think that is practical for those working two shifts and taking care of a family.
It absolutely is. They may be limited on what they can check. But critical thinking skills which is the main thing I'm advocating for could easily eliminate a lot of the junk. Which is more than anything what I'm advocating for. Critical thinking skills get people thinking about sources and verification and not just accepting what they're told.
That is well put. Thank you for that.