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
Do you like modern constitutional democracies over monarchies? You can thank people setting fire to everything, murdering politicians, billionaires, and their lackeys.
Do you like when workers have rights? You can thank people setting fire to everything, murdering politicians, billionaires, and their lackeys
Do you like civil rights? You can... well you get the idea
I'm not discounting that violent protest can work, and has worked in the past.
At the same time, ask the 20,000 people that were executed without trial or died in prison during the Reign of Terror if they think overthrowing the French monarchy was worth it. These things have costs, and that's generally not a door I want to open unless things are getting very very bad. It's easy to start calling for executions when you're confident the gun won't eventually be pointed at you, but historically, that's not a very safe bet to make, because plenty of innocents die in these kinds of things.
Or you just convince yourself that anyone who dies simply must have deserved it. That's not a judgement I feel comfortable passing.
It's easy to be fine with the way things are when you can be just comfortable enough hiding behind privilege. But sure, wait until things get worse, there are no time sensitive current threats to the existence of humanity anyway.
Maybe, but I think you'd find that most Americans, even young ones, wouldn't actually want to open up Reign of Terror: American Boogaloo. Perhaps that's privilege; maybe it's Maybelline.
The very existence of humanity is not something that is under meaningful threat according to any climate scientists I'm familiar with - even if there will be very significant challenges and changes that will disproportionately affect vulnerable populations - but I'm more than open to any evidence of actual apocalypse if you've got any.
Reign of Terror: American Boogaloo? Is that the official name of US foreign policy?
Anyhow, let's see how great and humanely the wait out and see strategy works when irreversible damage has been done and millions of displaced people show up, I'm sure it'll all work out fine.
Unless you're planning on picking up a gun yourself (in which case, best of luck with that), yes, I do think the more boring approach of slow incremental change is indeed what we're kind of stuck with. It's certainly not ideal or fair, and a lot of people will unduly suffer for it, but I'm skeptical that there's the kind of pent-up political demand for more radical alternatives that you seem to think exists. From some recent Pew data, only about 1/3 of Americans see a pressing need to fully phase-out fossil fuels. I can't imagine those people are exactly itching for literal terrorism.
It is curiously noted that you've casually moved the goal posts from "literal extinction of humanity" to "very challenging mass displacement".
At any rate, this conversation has obviously stopped being productive for either of us, so I'm happy to leave things there.
Well, good luck in your future endeavors protecting the precious status quo.
Thank you!