this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
642 points (99.7% liked)

politics

24208 readers
2821 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ynthrepic@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)
  1. and 4. Aren't right.

Peaceful protests aren't just performative. Not sure how I gave that impression. They are challenging authorities to demonstrate their commitment to the common good. Violence (even very mild violence) against peaceful people is unequivocally wrong unless they're doing something that might directly harm others.. like blocking an emergency vehicle route or something.

It also puts pressure on politicians to do the right thing.

Right now, against this government, we don't know how effective protests will be in the end. We don't know if military officers will remain loyal to the constitution and state leadership tover the orders of the dictator in chief.

There are too many unknowns and it's far too early to be giving up on a non-violent solution.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Well, to come clean, you're talking to an American who saw all this coming (in the broad strokes) five years ago and decamped to the UK for the long haul.

My view since then has been that after justice Ginsberg died in office, enough dominoes fell to make the fall of empire - one way or another, peacefully or otherwise - all but inevitable. Not that I put all of that on her, but it was a little selfish not to step down while a friendly administration could find a good replacement...

You're right that this administration sees protests the way a dictator does - if small, a pleasant invitation to violent reprisals, and if very large, inherently threatening. You're right in some things, but it's impossible to be narrowly coherent in a topic of this size so with apologies, you're getting a few paragraphs.

My broader view is that although the prior norms of the US government allowed for relative comfort domestically, they were built on the back of an economic and military empire abroad that was (still is) deeply disgraceful, and a return to form (even by peaceful protest) isn't very desirable given what it would require to accomplish.

In order to merely return to a horrible but comforting status quo, Americans would have to somehow defeat a would-be king, peacefully, while he controls a global empire whose violence would command the respect of any Mongol khan, who also has the blessing of a class of moneyed elites whose economic inequality puts the ancien régime into the shade. And you're thinking Americans will accomplish this? You flatterer.

If I had my druthers, we'd have a peaceful* revolution that dismantled the old system entirely, and quickly (quickly as hell given the geopolitical spinning plates we're holding) reform into something more akin to an EU with way less centralised power, hopefully a smaller military budget overall, and a shitload fewer billionaires.

*Without much if any factionalized armed conflict, per se. A nonviolent revolution does require that violence be available upon request.

The reason I left is that I don't see this level of general solidarity or awareness among my people. I think a different flavour of empire collapse is far likelier, and I've got people to protect now, or I'd probably still be there taking a flying fuck at the Nazis. I left my guns with sensible folk and left, instead.

So there's my whole deal. We're not likely to get it, but at least it's something worth wanting in the first place. I have to hope that merely imagining a future worth having is in some way contributing to the common endeavour. And I hope that by being more expansive we can understand one another better, or leastways bicker more productively.

[–] ynthrepic@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Well said yeah. There are definitely some nuances in the way to defend yourself in a country where everyone is armed to the teeth, and a whole lot of cynicism given the circumstances. My words are aspirational at best, I get that. In reality, I'm saying what I'm saying because I share your concerns for your people.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Laudable. Would be interested to know what country you're in/from - if only for the context of what cultural lens you're seeing this in.

[–] ynthrepic@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

New Zealand.

We're currently enjoying a right wing government with a few Trump inspired figures, skyrocketing cost of living, rising crime, and very disconcerting xenophobic and quasi racist musings coming out of certain public figures. But blissfully and blessedly we're a long way away from the chaos your brothers and sisters are going through now and the hell that may be soon to come.

The fear is the global world order falling apart may not be long in following.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Yeah. My whole life it's felt like I showed up at the end of the party. The older I get, the more I realise what a mess was made.