211
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2026
211 points (99.1% liked)
politics
31414 readers
3951 users here now
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
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm sorry your team is also islamophobic. Maybe you try and change them.
*edit
As an aside, I think your comment is worthy of an instance wide ban. People engaging in this kind of bad faith disparagement, when they're the ones supporting the racism of the Democratic party; they have no place in our community. Racism shouldn't have a home here simply because liberals are comfortable with a particular flavor.
This community does have a rule against calling someone a bot or paid actor....
Well its like insider trading. Rules are defined not by how they are written, but by how they are applied. This forum has silenced left wing, anti-fascist, anti-colonial voices, consistently and structurally, because moderation either ignores or sponsors those who would accuse others of being bots since its inception. There is nothing holding back administration or moderation from being better other than themselves. They choose to let behaviors slide when it supports their world view.
This space in particular has worked to center the kind of baseline implicit racism which has defined American liberalism in the post 9-11 era, as much as anywhere else. And thats why GuyFawkesV is comfortable making their accusations in the manner that they did. Because there are little to no consequences as such in doing so.
It should not be a bannable offense to point out that racist democratic opposition years ago to Ilhan Omar's candidacy has little to do with Trump's DOJ and their persecution of her due to baseless conspiracy theories. Fascists don't need to be enabled to be racist, they are already racist, and calling for someone to be banned for not automatically agreeing with you is a dick move.
Ahh yes. The "fascism is a mushroom that dropped from the sky overnight" approach to politics.
Fascists absolutely do need to be enabled to be successful and it's absolutely what history tells us about fascist movements. Fascism fundamentally depends on liberalism to clear it's runway. It doesn't pop out of the ether.
What trump is doing now isn't possible without the baseline islamaphobic racism as expressed within the Democratic party, an islamophobia which has been persistent for decades.
And you'll need to look up their deleted comment to understand the call for a ban. They were calling me a bot and advocating for violence (that I should be bombed). That's in addition to the baseline racism because of how Democrats have normalized it, is for whatever reason, just considered acceptable.
That's whose side you are taking.
No, fascists do not need to be "enabled." They will be fascists whether there are racists in the Democratic party or not. It's not like they said "Hey, a democrat is racist, so we can be too!" That's not how it works. They would be Islamophobic regardless if there are also Islamophobic democrats. The Democratic party has zero control over Islamophobia in the Republican party. This is stupid. Every single democrat in the whole country could not be racist and these people would still be racist. This shit is not hard to understand.
Fascists subvert institutions to gain power. The only way you can blame their opposition for "enabling" is by not killing them. I mean is that what you're trying to say? Because it sounds like you're trying to claim that somehow the Democratic party normalized racism and Islamophobia in recent decades which is total bullshit.
And your divisionist rhetoric needs to be banned as well. Bad faith actors don’t belong here.
Not your house tourist.
Critism is the only thing that can save Dems from themselves
I wish criticism would make divisionists stop spreading their bullshit.
Here's the thing, and you'll notice it here and across the elections and primaries this year: you fucking lost.
If what you are saying is true, which we can't entirely trust because you've obviously had to move alts: You lost the election for us by insisting the voters move to a pro genocide candidate, instead of demanding the candidate move to being anti genocide. and that very demand lost Democrats the election.
And we told you it would do that. And then it did. Then you tried to blame us for your moral failing.
And now, with the pro genocide Wing of the Democrats being at their lowest polling in history, specific because of what you advocated for, we've got a glimmer of hope in anti genocde, anti fascist, and pro socialist part of the party. That hope comes from our ability to correctly critique the actions of the Democratic party as a whole.
You, the one who wants to silence legitimate criticism: 2024 is in your head. and no matter how you try and spin it, this what history, and the general understanding among the population shows. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how elections and politics work, and it's a misunderstanding that bends towards authoritarianism.