this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
282 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19102 readers
4132 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
[–] Synthead 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Remember that time when we had a 40-something-year-long cold war with Russia, and then elected US officials decided to side with the country that's commiting genocide and absolutely countless war crimes?

Imagine if Russia took Ukraine. What standard would that set? Why wouldn't they want to continue outward to other parts of Europe? Remind me why we had two world wars, again?

Imagine if Russia decided to invade Florida. Would we just sit on our hands, cause we don't have the money? Would we blame the politics of Florida for not wanting to act?

I understand that Ukraine is a different country, but we live in a world with allyship. We have a great military standing, but our own propaganda will lead you to believe that we're the only big player in town. This is simply not true.

Turning your back on Ukraine in this time of war means that you have made a choice to side with Russia, China, North Korea, several countries in the Middle East, and all of their allies. Why would any sane person want to choose that?

If the reason is cost, then your opinion translates to the United States being too poor to prevent genocide and the spread of dictatorship. If the reason is military resources, then you're also saying that our defense is so brittle that we can't part with fractions of a percent of our reserves. Personally, I don't believe these things.

Plus, good lord, be a good human. You've seen the devastation that's happening in their country, right? Let's forget about imaginary political lines for a second. Why the hell would you choose for this to continue? They're shelling civilian areas, for Christ's sake.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

USSR = All citizens guaranteed healthcare, a yearly vacation, permanent residence, education, and a job, in a system with the highest level of social supports of any nation in human history or present. The Russian Federation = a Klepocratic Oligarchy who directly embezzled the majority of the public owned assets in the USSR for their own benefit, leading to a 10 year drop in life expectancy after the fall of the Soviet Union. All of this under the explicit western policy of “Shock Therapy”.

You: RUSSIA IS THE USSR

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Someone bought the Soviet propaganda wholesale.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The document states that the dictatorship in the USSR was a group that Stalin/Khruschev was the head of rather than just ruling entirely alone as a sole leader. Which is, y'know, usually how dictatorships work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Even In Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and I t seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain. However, 1t does not appear that any of the present leaders will rise to the stature of Lenin and Stalin,so that it will be safer to assume that developments in Moscow will be along the lines of what is called collective leadership, unless Western policies force the Soviets to stream- line their power organization.

Idk how you can misread the literal first paragraph.
“Even in Stalins time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the communist setup is exaggerated . Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization if the communist power structure. “.