this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
763 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19097 readers
6067 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
 

Just because Republicans choose unreality doesn’t mean the media should ignore the facts of January 6.

On January 6, 2021, I watched CNN as thousands of Donald Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol. As someone well-versed in watching tragedy on television, I was struck by just how indisputable the facts were at the time: violent, red-hat-clad MAGA rioters, followed by Republicans in Congress, tried to stop democracy in its tracks. Trump had told his followers that the protest in Washington, DC, “will be wild,” and in the assault that followed his speech, some rioters smeared feces on the walls of the Capitol. Hundreds of them have since been convicted on charges ranging from assault on federal officers to seditious conspiracy. These are stubborn facts, the kind that do not care about your feelings. These facts include the inalienable truth that Trump is the first president in American history to reject the peaceful transfer of power.

It never occurred to me that these facts could somehow be perverted by partisanship. But three years later, we are seeing just that, as Republicans cling to the lie that the 2020 election was “stolen” by Joe Biden and are poised to make Trump their 2024 nominee. And perhaps even more dangerous than the GOP ditching reality is the news media’s inability to cover Trumpism as the threat to democracy that it very much is.

...

But the problem is, when all you have is conventional political framing, everything looks like politics as usual. One candidate makes a claim; the other disputes it. Two sides are divided, etc. This framing only works if both parties operate within the frameworks of a shared reality. But Trumpism doesn’t allow for the reality the rest of us inhabit. Trump’s supporters believe their leader’s reality and not, say, the reality the rest of us see with our eyes. As Trump once told a crowd: “Don’t believe the crap you see from these people, the fake news. What you’re seeing and what you’re reading is not what’s happening.”

Journalists may be well-intentioned in trying to be “objective,” or they’re simply afraid of being labeled partisan. Either way, coverage of January 6 that gives equal weight to both sides—one based in reality, one not—is helping pave the road for authoritarianism.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Uh, what we are talking about is people who are already saying they won't vote for Biden. I run into this a lot. It's terrifying to know a significant part of the electorate are so myopic they would install Trump forever to "make a point".

It truly doesn't matter if they have a point, if the only end result is not voting or throwing their vote away on a third party. If Trump wins, they will be a big part of how.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It’s terrifying to know a significant part of the electorate are so myopic they would install Trump forever to “make a point”.

People don't like being manipulated to vote a certain way, they get angry when that is done to them. They realize that other citizens had died for their right to vote, and they hold it sacred.

And when you're angry, you tend to make dumb mistakes.

How many of us know the stance of the people they're going to vote for, when it comes to ranked choice voting?

[–] TheAlbacor@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"voting is the only way to create change" is the mentality that got us here.

You know why George Floyd's murderer was the only one who got the sentence he deserved? Because the people demanded it by threatening capital.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (25 children)
[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 2 points 10 months ago

You know exactly what he's suggesting and he's probably right to do so.

Stop playing stupid and stop trying to shut down people who say such things. It's not gonna work, you're not gonna convince anyone to not fight for what they believe in, hit the road if you don't like it.

[–] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

These guys all want violent revolution, right up until it's their time to pick up a rifle.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (31 children)

I think what the morons want is trump. I'm really worried about how common this braindead opinion is. They're actually going to vote against Biden because of Israel. We're fucked.

load more comments (31 replies)
[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

These guys all want violent revolution, right up until it’s their time to pick up a rifle.

"These guys" could just be foreign conflict bots, trying to promote mayhem.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"Everyone who is less than ecstatic about the genocide I love can't possibly be genuine. It must be an international conspiracy because no one could possibly oppose genocide."

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

“Everyone who is less than ecstatic about the genocide I love can’t possibly be genuine. It must be an international conspiracy because no one could possibly oppose genocide.”

Where's that quote from? Is it made up?

Generally speaking, you'd have to be very naive to assume that foreign nationals would not want to affect the population of potential enemies, and try to manipulate them with specific narratives. The interconnection of the species, communication wise, has good points and bad points.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

It's certainly a convenient way to dismiss people who disagree with centrists' support for genocide.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

As long as we are drawing the line in the sand as "reality" the truth is much more stark. We already live in a nation controlled by oligarchs and the vote has already been robbed of what little power it ever had. In a sense accelerationism isn't so much accelerating the decline of US democracy but accelerating its suspended funeral.

[–] Tristaniopsis@aussie.zone 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It’s not just ‘throwing the baby away with the bath water ‘, it’s burning down the whole fucking country just because mommy didn’t give you candy.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Where "mommy didn't give you candy" in this case is "the guy you're being screamed at to vote for is supporting genocide."

Just because you don't think genocide is a big deal, that doesn't mean you don't need the votes of those that do.

I'm voting for Biden, but that doesn't mean I don't recognize that some people won't, and that his support for genocide is the reason.