News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Yeah. I generally like Innuendo Studios a lot. I think the video is a pretty solid breakdown of some things that are important to understand (definitely superior to "conservatives = terrible people" which was generally the left's view, I think, even before it started taking on some strong reality as of about 10 years ago). My only gripe is that it gives way too much credit for intellectual consistency. I actually agree with 100% of the how it breaks down the intellectual foundations of conservatism, and for that reason I actually think classical conservatism in the pre-Reagan sense is fine. Just like the balancing acts of liberalism and conservatism he talks about near the end, I think a good society builds on a balancing act of hierarchical conservatism vs. egalitarian democracy. I don't think that's why modern conservatives are conservatives, though. Around Reagan-time, it started to stem more from propaganda from rich people, engineering very deliberate propaganda with which people get inundated, which tells them that rich people deserve their wealth and need more handouts. And, in the modern generation of MAGA-style conservatives, they don't even care about that stuff. It's pure emotion. Conservatism can be a mass movement to overthrow the government (made of white men), conservatism can be social security for me because I earned it, conservatism can be subsidies for farmers because that's what our country needs in order to be strong. It literally just doesn't matter anymore. Their systems of critical thought have been so atrophied and their understanding of the world is so badly askew that you can present literally almost anything to them, from the right authority and with the right emotional content, and they'll get behind it.
In my view, the intellectual hierarchical conservatism it talks about is fine, as long as it's moderated with a strong democracy that can keep it in check. Going too far in either direction is bad. But, unfortunately, that has very little to do with any political question in our current reality (in the US at least, definitely), because the "conservatives" have so little to do with intellectually-consistent conservatism (whether you agree with that version or not) that it doesn't really matter what that version is about. Modern "conservatism" just means a tribe that'll kill you if you get in their way. For example I don't think the conservative from the beginning example, in the modern day, would be arriving at what he's saying in his argument based on what he believes. He's just going to be echoing stuff he heard from his authorities, which may have some passing resemblance to the foundations, or it may just be emotionally-laden nonsense which he's been programmed to emit at you under the right circumstances.