Shit's getting wild.
Delaware says corporations can vote.
Hawaii says corporations can go fuck themselves lol
this post was submitted on 27 May 2026
1299 points (99.5% liked)
Uplifting News
19010 readers
510 users here now
Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews (rules), a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity and rage (e.g. schadenfreude) often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news—in text form or otherwise—that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good, from a quality outlet that does not publish bad copies of copies of copies.
Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
wait for the supreme court to overturn it because it "violates the free speech of companies" or sth
that's why we need states' rights, sothat we're resilient against the bullshit of the fed.gov. because let's face it, 90% of the fuck-ups happen at the fed.gov level. the municipality can do a lot of good. the city builds schools, the fed.gov goes to war with iraq.
mamdani paves the way. that's what we need in every city. taxes should be paid to the city, not to the fed.gov. that's what brings political power down to the lower level, closer to the people, holds politicians more directly accountable since they now live within walking distance of the population and every vote matters more on the smaller level.
Interesting that Democrats have become the party of state's rights now.
It's always been a defensive redoubt for the party out of power. Very popular among Democrats during the Bush and Reagan years, too.
that was trump's plan all along :p
Absolutely. I would encourage you to give the video a watch as this part directly addresses your concerns about 'violates free speech' and state rights.
It's a damn shame Mamdani is ineligible to run for president.
They really should do this with a lot more activities, make gambling legal but illegal for any corporation to be involved in. That way a couple friends can make friendly wagers but huge corporations aren't ruining millions of lives through gambling addiction.
Instead we have it completely backwards, legal for corporations to take bets with a house advantage doesn't matter how many people gamble their rent money away, but then if joe schmoe has poker night at his house with a few friends, he's got to worry about the cops raiding his home.
a couple friends can make friendly wagers
This was already legal.
The prohibition on gambling is predicated on a share of the winnings going to a House. Specifically, "bookmaking", where a broker arranged odds and returns on multiple parties. Regulated gambling is all predicated on state enforcement of fair betting procedures and machines with set odds.
Nobody was getting arrested for doing handshake bets on the Nicks playoff outcome. At the same time, no court was going to honor a lost bet as a debt owed to the winning party.
Does Citizens United even matter that much anymore? We're at the point where individual billionaires are making massive campaign donations and even transparent bribes. Removing the ability for corporations to contribute to campaign finance just reveals one layer of dark money, but it doesn't solve the problem of the power of wealth in politics.
It matters in that a lot of actors would rather remain private (as demonstrated by the very existence of super-PACs).
However, all of this money should be cut off from our elections. What other country does this? The USA has a constant campaign cycle and we're spending an unfathomable amount of money to pitch unpopular candidates. We can do that for free, believe it or not we don't need to buy advertising from FOX and NBC.
I'm not familiar with world-wide campaign financing rules, but it seems to me almost anything else would be preferable to corporate sponsorship and control of politics.
It would be better if the politicians wore patches on their sport coats showing who their sponsors are. Larger patches for larger donors
Can states ban corporations? That'd be nice.
Corporations are fundamentally state created entities. So in theory a state could do that.
But corporations aren't inherently bad. For instance Municipal Housing Corporations are usually the vehicle for producing rent-controlled affordable housing.
Not for profits are also corporations.
If we want to nationalize things like energy and internet away from the private sector we would still use corporations to do that.
Ban private corporations.
Or create new structures.
Its all made up!
We can change to suit our needs.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Even in all of those cases, I'm of the view that if it isn't a democratized organization, then it is at least a potential threat to democratized institutions.
Genuinely wild that democracy is propped up by private industry to ensure their own interests. Its farcical.
It's almost like capitalism is inherently incompatible with democracy.
except all those democracies where its completely fine.
The more capitalism is limited, the better it is to live in those places. Unless of course the country is owned or populated by oligarchs, because their slaves probably don't tip the scales on the data that gets published.
Such as?
It's certainly cheaper to bribe a handful of representatives than it is to bombard the entire population with propaganda.
Although it's wishful thinking to suggest they won't go back to that to get what they want.
Although it’s wishful thinking to suggest they won’t go back to that to get what they want.
Let's hope that the oligarchs that own the news we watch, the newspapers we read, and the streaming service we consume, stay kind and don't start using those platforms for spreading propaganda! Man I'd be so upset if it turns out that all this time I've been watching and reading propaganda and taking it as fact and basing my opinions on it.
With "AI" and all these new mega scale data centers popping up, they'll be able to do both at the same time for half the price!
A state can do that? That's AMAZING!
If this passes the courts, then this is a massive game changer. Blue states can do it, and once they start getting better, the Red states will want to it, and they can have the battle with the wealthy to remain corrupt. That will be fun to watch.
i don’t think democrats would like it
They'll probably prefer it to the gallows. The people are really starting to get antsy.
you're saying they would be afraid of the gallows, for the sole purpose of saying they'd do it, which would mean that we wouldn't need to give them the gallows. that is one step away from saying we don't need the gallows because they'd do it by themselves. that is dangerous.
It doesn’t take effect until 2027. So they have plenty of time to overturn it and keep cheating for the midterm elections.
load more comments
(3 replies)
The reasoning explained in the article makes sense to me, but as a non-lawyer I've learned that lawyer logic is not always the same as the kind the rest of the universe operates on. But I sure hope this works!
Hold for the supreme court overturning it in 4... 3...
I'm sure Clarence Thomas has a gift about it. Wait, did I say "gift?" What a silly thing to say. I meant "opinion."
The power to create and limit corporations has been the exclusive power of States for 200 years and upheld multiple times in SCOTUS.
load more comments
(47 replies)
view more: next ›