this post was submitted on 28 May 2026
310 points (95.9% liked)

politics

29940 readers
1960 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Snowies@lemmy.zip 30 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Is not that they don’t know.

All of them know.

The moderate Democrat politicians know they are a doormat for the corporate donor class. They refuse to enact meaningful change because then they lose their corporate donor money (and they’d have to do real work.)

MAGA politicians know they are betraying America to be a doormat for Donald Trump. They refuse to stand up to him because then they lose their billionaire donor money/Trump pardon protection (and they’d have to grow a conscience).

Our government has been captured by dejected cynics and sadistic sociopaths who only work for and represent people with a lot of money.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is by design. A country for the rich by the rich from the start. And people have the gall to act surprised at the corruption that was there from the start. Our first President was set to become the world's first billionaire adjusted for inflation. If he had not died so young he would have.

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 34 points 5 days ago

You have a party that is desperate to go back to a past utopia that never existed and another that is determined to maintain a status quo that absolutely failed.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 63 points 6 days ago

Failure? Pretty sure the oligarchy is getting exactly what they want.

[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 39 points 5 days ago (2 children)

What failure? They've done their job perfectly as controlled opposition. The real failure is people expecting anything else from them.

[–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I'm tired of having the same discussion over and over again with neo-liberals that they aren't anywhere near left and their mandates of "less harm" or "lesser of two evils" doesn't work anymore. So they have no actual platform or real plans for anything substantial that would be secured. Letting things float on in good faith.

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Lesser of two evils is just for general elections where you only have two choices and you need to slow the rise of fascism.

Progressives need to get on with primarying the fuck out of establishment Democrats. When you have a progressive running against a fascist in the general, polls have shown that the progressive ideas will win....if the voters are focused on policy rather than succumbing to emotional manipulation.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 3 days ago

MAGAs always want to make every election about what people want to do with their own genitals. And Dems usually go along with it.

They've already started talking about James Talarico's genitals. They are fascinated by them.

[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 days ago

Preach. I'm pretty far left and I am constantly being spammed for money by Dem fundraising. I tell them they can pry it out of my cold dead fingers, or they can come up with a platform better than, "well at least we aren't trump."

The death of Neoliberalism 

, ironically Neoliberalism has killed itself by being too successful, it has never been easier for people with a lot of money to move their fortune and businesses elsewhere.

So certain people and companies become nigh untaxable and impossible to regulate, now if it was a case that these people just furthered themselves and their business that would be one thing.

But they don't have interesting ideas about race, or "the woke", or climate change, or a whole host of unpleasantness so they use the power they have to further their petty aims. and narcissistic tendencies.

And now the dam is broken with Musk and Trump shattering all norms, who exactly is going to tell them no in the future?

Who can tell them no?

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Whatever is behind Samuel L. Jackson (seat cushions?) looks like a pack of hotdogs.

[–] zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Diner seat cushions, but now they will forever be hotdogs.

[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 21 points 5 days ago (3 children)

In my long study of history there is always a tipping point. 1789, 1840, 1905, 1917 - people just took power back, or made a serious effort to do the same. Not that it was perfect either. The history of humanity is one of struggle against the elites.

In the case of the US, corporations being recognised as actual living, breathing human beings only made revolution a certainty. The only question is when? I'm an old fart, so I hopefully won't be around to see the inevitable chaos.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There have only been a few places in history where the people actually took back control temporarily with Haiti being one of them. Of course now they have one of the most extreme wealth gaps around.

If the history of the world has been a struggle against the ruling class, that struggle has amounted to a wet fart.

[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't know about that? France, the United States, China, Cuba, Vietnam, Philippines, Nicolae Ceaușescu in Romania, the fall of the Romanovs in Russia were all a thing.

Besides which, I think that you are missing my point. Success isn't guaranteed in Revolution, that's why I included 1905. I was talking about tipping points that lead to revolution. What happens next can go either way.

The wet fart bit is that you just used Hati to disprove a point that I never made in the first place.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sorry, I am not counting revolutions that amounted to trading one aristocracy for another.

I never said you made that point, I was just talking. I simply don't believe your revolutions were that revolutionary. I gave an example of a truly revolutionary movement that has amounted to one of the largest wealth gaps in the world.

This is teaching us a bigger lesson, one that so many glaze over.

[–] slickgoat@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I take that point. I also make the point that at the beginning of most revolutions the outcome is unknown. Entrenchment of a new regime can only be understood once the outcome has been decided. To make your argument you are permitted to accept or discount revolutions according to your whim.

My entire point was about historical tipping points. In this very simple concept I have been misunderstood. One person accused me of encouraging revolt. You seem to think that my argument doesn't work because a great many revolutions fail. You are right. A great many do. But I'm not advocating for revolts nor suggesting that they always work. I'm saying that when conditions reach a certain point, they are almost inevitable. Not always even then. North Korea is a case in point.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I totally get what you are saying but I will reserve the right to judge revolutions based upon who started them and their actual results.

I have often had a thought experiment just what it would take for US citizens to rebel. Things are pretty bleak for a lot of people already. The US government has been waging a slow walk genocide with the War on Drugs since before I was born. Millions of families destroyed.

Clearly gun violence, overdoses, excessive incarceration, systemic sexism/racism, and environmental degredation has taken an incredible toll on the US population. The reality is most people don't even realize this and probably never will. So I am a bit dubious that there will be any sort of cultural revolution soon.

Now if by revolution you mean the US descending into some sort of techno feudalist/fascist hellscape then I would probably say it looks like we are already here.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 43 points 6 days ago (9 children)

They've been able to effectively convince the k-hive that it wasn't their failure; that it was the failure of voters. Those convinced of this narrative are the biggest threat to being able to stop fascism using electoral or other tools.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Major_Tsiom@fedia.io 37 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The Democrats are a capital party just like the Republicans. We do not have a labor party in the US. Fascists and racists have their Republican Party, but liberals only have the lesser evil. There is no loyalty. We need a third party to represent labor. The two party/winner take all system is a fucking joke.

The lesser evil of fascism is still fascism. Just with a pride flag in June.

[–] BooBees@fedinsfw.app 15 points 5 days ago

There are third parties, they’ve even spoiled some elections. I think you mean a VIABLE third party.

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 26 points 5 days ago (1 children)

One thing that really sucks about today's world is that everything seems too big to fail.

Shitty car dealers? Sorry can't remove them. Shitty banks? Sorry too powerful. Shitty cable? Sorry it's the only option. Shitty cellular? Sorry only service. Shitty political party? Sorry other option is worse.

Capitalism has a way of squeezing everything into a few hands where we are basically fucked once it reaches the end stage.

The problem is that during the run up you seem to get better service / value as it's fighting for the top spot, but once there you are totally fucked.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 4 points 4 days ago

The problem is that during the run up you seem to get better service / value as it’s fighting for the top spot, but once there you are totally fucked.

This is the essence of enshittification

[–] BetaBlake@lemmy.world 32 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Democratic socialista need to change their name to the labor party and start championing Bernie's message of the past 40 years. Appealing to people on the right and left

[–] realitista@lemmus.org 14 points 5 days ago

This is exactly the scenario that the Democratic party is working so hard to quash.

[–] GodofLies@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 days ago

They know. They just insist that their ideology is all that matters and everyone should just "shut up and follow" and somehow it will all work out. This is what established politicians (read as in this case: establishment democrats/career politicians) standby. We know this doesn't work.

This is why people need to start voting for actual progressives. Look at what they say versus what they vote for. Compared to who is challenging them.

Then match it with the outcomes of those voted on policies. Is it so hard? Because I know a good amount of people can't seem to even bother.

Add in the bit of, "how do you know the challenger will actually be faithful on their promises?". Well, clearly the status quo (aka, the same person you elect in) isn't going to make the change you want, so why keep them?

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Democrats win by failing. For their corporate bankrollers.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Like a boxer getting paid to throw a match?

Exactly like that, except the paying is a few steps removed so it "doesn't count as bribery"

[–] Freeposity@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Weird that AIPAC isn't mentioned at all in the comments.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mycodesucks@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago

Whoa... Big news. They're determined about something.

load more comments
view more: next ›