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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
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
It's always "liberal indoctrination" to them. Because they can't understand that being more exposed to more ideas tends to make you less conservative. Also, it feels like a tacit admission that their own "education" was really indoctrination. That's probably one reason why they think all education is such.
Vance is Yale educated and the professor who set him up with his wife also got her SC clerkships... He and his wife were literally groomed to be a political power couple similar to the Clintons.
Stop acting like hes stupid and uneducated.
He 100% know what he's saying is bullshit, hes a liar not an idiot. trump is an idiot, and believes it.
That's why Vance is so much more dangerous, it's like comparing HW to Reagan. Both evil, but an evil elderly person with dementia does less damage than an evil intelligent person.
He's not uneducated, but he still seems pretty stupid. Brother can't give a single public speech without seeming like a complete idiot.
Same with HW bush..
Didn't stop him from becoming president on Reagans coattails.
And HW not only caused just as much damage as Reagan, he was smart about it so still gets a fraction of the blame. His name is almost never brought up anymore.
People just talk about the idiot fall guys, because the whole reason they're there is to be the lightning rod of criticism so no one looks at the ones calling the shots.
It's a shell game, but at least when it's an idiot they'll get caught and some things will be stopped, or at least noticed.
Mostly out of curiosity but what'd HW do? I think we can squarely put more of the war on drugs on his shoulders than Reagan's but, outside of that, I can think of so many more concrete things Reagan did to worsen and destabilize America (even if the effects were much later) than I can for the 1-term HW (but that may just be unfamiliarity, on my part).
Agreed. He's probably trying to mainstream Curtis Yarvin style insanity. Thing is that "JD" "Vance" and Curtis are a lot more educated than the people they are pitching this shit to.
It's an Ivy League school.
Years ago, an ex-girlfriend was proctoring a course at an Ivy League. She had a billionaire's daughter, a legacy admission, in one of her classes. The billionaire's daughter never showed up to class. My ex-gf failed her. Later, when she looked at the recorded grades, the billionaire's daughter who never showed up for class had a 'C.'
George W. Bush graduated from Yale with a C average.
Ivy League schools educate many people. But they often just give degrees to the legacy admissions, to the wealthy, and to the politically connected.
Knowledge is the cure to conservatism.
You cannot simultaneously hold right-wing views and know enough about the world to have any valid opinions about how it should be run.
I am not a right-wing voter and don't consider myself a centrist, but discarding all right-wing views as faulty isn't gonna help to bring about a healthy democratic conversation. I would argue it is in the benefit of everyone to make a distinction between extreme/far-right views and 'regular' right-wing views.
Knowledge is a cure for a lot of things, no argument there.
Right wing politics is ultimately about concentrating power in the hands of the aristocracy of the day or distracting the public whilst the former goal is furthered.
These goals are to the detriment of modern society and should be wholly resisted. The goals of modern society are to create the rising tide to lift all ships.
There is zero value in the right wing school of thought beyond the warning to not pursue it we all got ~80 years ago.
Disagree. It's about enriching the self. It's about stonewalling or reversing social power.
It results in aristocracy but poor right wingers are not driven by that goal.
theyrethesamepicture.jpg
The difference is how much one is able to "enrich" their self, is determined by how much they're willing to crush others to elevate themselves. The ultimate conclusion is concentrated power.
We agree there. I'm highlighting that creating an aristocracy is a side effect, not a goal.
No.
Aristocracy is absolutely the goal. Rugged individualism is simply the most popular lie used to attain that goal.
Disagree.
The rugged individualism is what makes it popular, not the desire to be a serf.
That's like saying everything left is bad because look at how the Sovjets ended up
The soviets were authoritarians...
Ones with a terrible human rights record.
Like, even if you ignore everything except a left/right economic scale, their wealth inequality was insane. Most people had the same: nothing. And a few people had almost everything of value in the country.
That's not communism, that's an oligarchy. The only further right on an economic scale would be a single person owning everything.
No, it's just simply understanding the end goals of an ideology.
Name three that aren't.
They have to work so hard at just propping up their biases (on penalty of hell in many cases) that it's hard to conceive of a world where other people aren't also secretly doing that.
We should really drop the narrative of the uneducated right. They love power more than progress.