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
Mamdani is a centrist, he isn't left. But since the Republicans are alt right and the Democrats are right, they consider everything else to be far left and label anything that isn't right as communist. They don't know what communism is. Even Trump labeled people communist nazis. Communists and nazis are the opposite of eachother. Americans are so, so fucking dumb.
Not even communist seems to know what communism is anymore considering China has went full on fascist as well as being an oligarchy for the last 70 years.
Mate, the USSR wasn't even communist. Because communism doesn't have a government run by elites and a dictator as a sole leader. It's a wrong interpretation of what communism actually is, because bad people see a way to abuse the system to gain wealth and power. This is what happens everywhere. Rotten apples do not play fair and because of that always have an advantage in gaining positions of power. This happens everywhere. The USSR, China, modern day Russia, the US, etc.
Yes, that makes complete sense. Almost like democracy/socialism/communism is really just rhetoric for power and control.
No it's not. They are concepts of how to have a society. They are different structures. The biggest issue with them is that in most cases they didn't take into account the systems can be abused. Its hard to avoid abuse and corruption, as the systems are very complex. The more complex, the more opportunities there are for people to exploit.
I can't remember who it was. But some wise person said that people applying for jobs that hold power, should automatically be rejected. The only people who should have those jobs should be dragged against their will and put there, and should only be allowed to leave when they did good.
Next to that I believe people with those jobs should have proper background checks, psychological tests and IQ tests. And they should always be held accountable for their actions.
I think this is necessary to have systems like communism and democracy work somewhat decently, with a reduced chance of abuse of power. But I prefer anarchism, where there are no country borders, no huge huge governments who dictate their rules but small communities who manage themselves the way that works best for them.
I think we are splitting hairs here. I get you believe these concepts exist outside of reality as an ideal. I just don't see it that way anymore. They are just excuses powerful and well connected people use to create the consent of the governed. The propaganda if you will.
We are "democratic socialist state" or we are "unitary communist state" is inconsequential to the reality of policy and how the government(s) actually work.
I agree with the reasoning that those who want power should not have it and those who don't want power generally make better leaders as far as creating policies that benefit society as a whole. As opposed to just special interest groups.
We would have to create an new form of government that was designed to resist corruption instead of embracing it to change this all to common dynamic.
Having a pool of qualified and randomly selected individuals for representation is one idea I have heard. I think we need a truly radical approach to shake off the olgiarchies that the world is currently controlled by.
Just like democracy, communism, socialism, anarchism, etc these ideals are just that. Unless we can translate these ideals to actual passed and enforced policies they are nothing but lip service.
Call me jaded, but with the ever increasing worldwide wealth gaps no system has any answers and the few examples of anarchism, such as Rojava, have already been absorbed by the state.
It seems anarchism could only exist in a vacuum which points out the need to develop a real set of enforceable and attainable policies to make it work alongside a state actor.
He might not be as left as you'd like, but calling Mamdani a centrist is just ignorant
Not to people outside the US it isn’t
Par the course for anarchists.
If he would be a politician in my country he would he centrist, maybe a fraction on the left of the centre. But if the rest in the US is either right or alt right, I get that he looks really left. But his political views are similar to our centrist politicians.
That might be true in Europe, but it's complete bullshit in the USA.
If the only 2 parties are both right, anything else looks left. It's a matter of contrast. But Mamdani is centre on the political spectrum, maybe slightly on the left but definitely not far.