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
That means this bill has to define socialism. Good luck with that one bucko, if you have 10 socialists in a room, you get 11 definitions /s
I'm genuinely curious how it gets defined. I'm wondering if it can be sidestepped with a simple word change
It's reds under the bed. If anyone in a position of power says you're a socialist then you're a socialist and you get made stateless and dumped in Nigeria.
Yea this is absolutely red scare bs, but I'm morbidly curious about this thought crime
It's not meant to have a definition. That's why the proposed law denies judicial review. The "definition" is supposed to be whatever the ICE ~~Officer(s)~~ Gestapo wants it to be.
That's not an issue with the law, it's a feature. They don't need to prove you fit a definition. They only need to prove that they can call you a socialist. Anyone to the left of whatever positions they don't like are in danger of this law. It doesn't matter if you'd call yourself a socialist, only if they would.
The law states tge process has no legal review, so its whatever definition ICE wants to use, since no judge can say its wrong.
A law designed to break multiple laws.
?? whom ever is head of Immigration says it is.. it will be deliberately nebulous so you can say "banned because they are a socialist " if you have dark skin and don't wear Kirkland pants to the interview.
there's laws about terrorists without that being defined. they'll manage without one.
Probably would include someone who says "I am a socialist." Hence calling it the Mamdani act.
I mean, every Anti-Woke person got a full on definition from Republicans which is described as an awareness of social inequalities within racial, gender, and workplace environments.
So basically, all the right wing nut jobs wanted to "get rid of 'woke'" is perfectly okay with the idea of having rights for me, not for you, that women, POC and LGBTQ+ people should have less rights than cis white men.
They can define socialism all they want and the frothing low-IQ dipshits will still vote for it, even if the definition of socialism straight up tells them their lives would be better under it.
It's never about the definition. It's never about any of it. It's entirely about their own slice of pie. Anyone else getting any semblance of good will means less to them.
It's why they're against gay marriage. If two men get married, it somehow makes his marriage to a woman invalidated.