politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
No, I didn't do that. If you want to have a conversation than you should address what I said.
no.
you tell me what in my post was antisemitic first, and then we will see if I choose to initiate a conversation.
Well its multifaceted.
Your starting position is that people aren't in unanimous agreement with you because they are afraid Jews will call them antisemites.
You then go on to claim that Jews are already calling us all antisemites so we have no reason to not agree with you.
If not antisemitic, it is reductionist to the point of being mistaken for it, so what did it add to the dialog?
I didn't say people who agree with me are afraid jews will call them antisemitic. if anything I said. people, people close to and or in power are not being as explicit as I am. and by the way, jews aren't calling people antisemitic. people who support a pro israel only agenda are calling people antisemitic. that includes jewish people who are vocal about what israel is doing. that's why that word has no power. and in no way did I suggest people do not have a reason to disagree with me, other than intentionally misreading my comment to try to draw out an argument.
if all of that is beyond you and it clearly is, having a discussion with you would be similar to wrestling with a pig in mud: you end up angry and muddy and. the pig just enjoys it. I choose to not engage.
So the people are in power agree with you, but won't explicitly say so, because they are afraid of being called anti Semites by people who aren't Jewish?
If you are unable to support the Palestinian people without the insinuations of conspiracy you have to consider that you may be further harming the Palestinian people, rather than aiding them.