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
NATO should've been put as a separate issue public vote, whatever it's called in English. To make an international example, in the US they can vote for big shit or the lesser shit, so people vote for lesser shit, but that doesn't mean they want lesser shit policies.
Imo it's a big wrangled to say we voted for this, when we vote for packages and our options are severely limited. Maybe you agree?
you mean it should be settled out in a referendum?
That's the word 👍 (direct translation is people vote)
What I meant was we did vote for the current government and their behaviour when it comes to financial policy is no surprise to me. In fact it is so unsurprising that I'm more surprised that anyone is surprised.
Them being elected on the NATO question is kind of moot IMO since the Social Democrats already initiated. I think it's fine to want to have a separate vote on the issue though I personally do not believe the public can be fully informed to make such a decision in our current world of nation states. That decision, and decisions on most national security issues, should be made on the basis of facts that you and I do not have access to.
You can apply that to any issue. People will often vote against their best interest but it shows whether or not it was wanted.
My brother in Carl XVI Gustaf they obviously had better information that the plebian, but still systematically dismantled the military to five guys, a bucket, and a goat. I wouldn't trust them to put their boots on the right foot
As I said, it's fine to want the vote. I am not against it, but I'm not invested in it either. In the end our elected politicians are just human beings like all of us citizens, because they are citizens just like us. They're bound to make mistakes like anyone else. Blind trust isn't healthy but neither is contempt.
Sure sure. I didn't mean so. It's just that we had multiple governments that apparently "didn't see it coming" on anything.
In gymnasium evidently we did a better world analysis after the Russian invasion of Crimea and subsequent illegal annexation. Placing Russian controlled agents of chaos and ruski green men in the Eastern regions.
There was no question it would continue. Trump wants to get out of NATO, we'll see how it ends. Not only this, but we have the CCP blatantly extending their territory and tricking other nations into shitty infrastructure deals that never amount to what's promised.
This rustles me so sorry if I'm just going on tangents
I don't disagree that these issues are very real and have been for a long time. We just have to trust that human beings can change their outlook when they're proven wrong and that our politics are starting to align with the reality of our eastern neighbor attacking countries.
We have representative democracy meaning we elect politicians to make decisions for us. While we do have the option to vote on single issue topics it's unusual, and there are more and less suitable topics for the public to vote on. Voting on the NATO issue is probably the least suitable. Much of the basis for entering NATO are secrets not revealed to the public. And considering Russia managed to tamper with the us election, can you imagine what impact they could have on a vote like this?
We've had public votes for single issues before, like nuclear power, euro, and EU.
Russian and in extension Chinese influence is mostly astroturfing opinions. They give money to entities like PragerU and others to push any conflicting information. Hence the MAGA cult.
Better believe in information war, herr Vaniljkram, you're in one.
Did you want to explain why it would be a good idea to have a public vote on NATO?
Because then we'd at least have the option, and the people who are to be sent to wars get to actually weigh what they feel.
It's not perfect, but it'd be better