this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2024
869 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3594 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Reagan wasn’t hit by Iran Contra until '87, and it nearly sank the Bush '88 campaign for President.

My apologies for getting the timelines slightly mixed up. In my defense I was 4 at the time. However, Bush winning in '88 despite being neck deep in an administration full of openly admitted liars doesn't exactly bode well for your argument that US voters aren't pretty A-OK with corruption.

The idea of a single all-power Ubermensch Superman isn’t a socialist view.

Nah, it's a human one, and one that's extremely common in the US despite our governmental structure all but guaranteeing that one guy alone can't fix things.

We love simple power structures, because we're simple beings. It's also why I think there is more to horseshoe theory than people want to admit. Communists claim to want gay space communism but seem A-OK with some stupid asshole being basically a dictator as long as its their type of stupid asshole.

Once we formed up larger civilized order, it took us millennia to conceive of a different type of governance aside from "what one stupid asshole says goes".

Time and again, large cooperative campaigns of mutual aid provide better outcomes than the public putting all our hopes on a handful of aristocratic elites.

I somewhat agree? I think? But I'm not sure it has much to do with anything we're discussing.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

However, Bush winning in '88 despite being neck deep in an administration full of openly admitted liars doesn’t exactly bode well for your argument

Bush Sr's claim to fame before joining the Reagan team was as the guy who cleaned up the CIA after Ford replaced Nixon. He successfully distanced himself from Reagan, while tarring Mondale with a number of Massachusetts scandals.

Nah, it’s a human one

It's a media-based one. Mass media has been pivotal in expanding and inflating the reputations of larger-than-life individuals (real and imagined). Without mass media, "Superman" is just another pagan icon of a neighboring tribe.

Communists claim to want gay space communism but seem A-OK with some stupid asshole being basically a dictator

Its strange to see the American right champion Europeans like Macron and Merkel or literal Monarchies in the UK, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan. They'll endorse coups such Anez's failed takeover of Bolivia or Park's military junta in Korea or The Jakarta Method in Indonesia or Juan Guaido and Fulgencio Batista looting the Venezuelan and Cuban treasuries. They'll shrug their shoulders at the electoral college, the corrupt SCOTUS, and the blatant disenfranchisement of any number of their states.

But when a popular President wins a landslide in a free and fair democratic election, they suddenly start to see the Tyranny of the Masses. Whether you're a South African post-Apartheid Congress or a Mexican President who wins with over 60% of the vote, you're constantly under the microscope, under the theory that you can't win a legitimate election unless your population loves American more than the Americans love themselves.

But I’m not sure it has much to do with anything we’re discussing.

Go figure.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Mass media has been pivotal in expanding and inflating the reputations of larger-than-life individuals (real and imagined).

I mean people belong to cults. I don't think they joined because of the news (which doesn't even cover them). People are idiots.

Its strange to see the American right

I'd agree full stop right there. They're a strange beast. In a way it's possible (though not something I'd bother with) to feel somewhat sorry for them...what with them being so anti-immigration in a country teeming with nothing but immigrants.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I put myself as a top plop on the pile, friendo.

I'm convinced I'm pretty immune to being sucked into a cult, but aside from that I consider myself about as stupid as your average people.

EDIT: I also don't think of us as "sheep" or "glassy-eyed automatons". I think we, as a species, are a different type of stupid. We spend most of our lives deluding ourselves into thinking that we're somehow above (or the winners of) the natural order. We spend enough time in denial to buy a second home there. Our true nature isn't all that much different from a monkey picking flies off of its shoulders in the jungle....just with more zoom calls.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I put myself as a top plop on the pile, friendo

That's the joke, yes.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

The top plop of shit is just as indistinguishable from the rest of the shit, it was just plopped more recently.