this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
768 points (99.6% liked)

politics

19298 readers
2221 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And my point is that you don't need data and rigor for every single discussion.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

For something so sensitive, I like to have it. I won't accept any broad generalization unless backed by a reputable study.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You're kinda sensitive about everything. You want a 300-page thesis before acknowledging that 1+1=2.

Which it's kinda funny, this whole thing has been an aside but like...you said you tried to read it and didn't really understand it. Is that really what you need to have a casual conversation about something? A proof, study, or document too long or complicated for you to be able to prove it's wrong?

[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I don't want it, I said that it exists and it was needed because science it's an exact thing that requires proofs, experiments and data. What I want is any data that shows that Zionism causes a rise in Antisemitism, because I haven't seen any change. I only got "trust me bro" so far.

I also use electricity without knowing how a nuclear reactor works, if you want to criticize that.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm not quite sure that belief in zionism is measurable, but I'm sure you can find a source about antisemitism and zionist actions by Israel.

Anecdotally, I haven't seen as many "stop the hate" campaigns that are basically about antisemitism as I have since the major military actions started in the Gaza in my lifetime.

I'd look it up if I really cared anything about the outcome of the discussion but it really doesn't interest me that much to be honest.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 2 points 6 hours ago

Fair enough. I did look for sources (one Google search to be precise) and haven't found anything, so what we have is a bunch of anecdotal data that hardly serves as basis for any wide-reaching conclusions.