World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I didn't really mean it was ever an explicit position, beyond possibly your Carville strategist types in smoke-filled rooms, but the fact remains that Roe v. Wade was always being chipped away at, in courts and statehouses and law schools, and at several points in the 50 years that it was in effect the Democrats had the power necessary to put up a legislative firewall (see, e.g. Obamacare), but they took no action while reminding voters every election who supported choice. They didn't even have to lie, but there was always a "better" use of political capital, and nothing was done until it was too late.
Labour is in a somewhat analogous situation, in that they have taken power, and they can blame the hardships of Brexit on Tories, and they know the UK is better off in the EU, but they have other priorities. I am fully aware that they need to be prudent, and maybe repairing relationships is meaningful progress, but this could also be tickmark #1 on a ledger called "Times that Labour could have fixed Brexit but didn't."
I don't think the Democrats had the uncontested power to put up an amendment or any other pro-women's-health legislation very often in those 50 years. The one time I can think of is the one you mentioned, and they decided to use that power to pass the ACA instead. They had lost the supermajority by the time that was done.
All that "chipping away" wouldn't have made much of a difference if the SCOTUS hadn't been obscenely hijacked and thrown to the Federalist nazis. And all of that was because the republiQans never wavered, never changed their commitment to depriving women of their rights.
In the case of Starmer vis-a-vis EU, I obviously don't know the details very well, but I would think they're not going to be able to have any kind of public discussion about rejoining anytime in the next 5-10 years at the earliest. I would expect there to be some backchannel discussion, but I can't see any real headway being made. Certainly if I was the EU, I wouldn't be interested in talking about it at all. I would think Labour would have enough on their plate just beginning to stem some of the damage that's already been caused.