this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
59 points (89.3% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3527 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
 

Hillary Rodham Clinton-(https://archive.ph/goTP7)

all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Our greed culture is the root cause of this. You can trace the distancing of Americans back to when Ronald Reagan gave away the store to the rich and businesses went from valuing their workforces to seeing them as a disposable drain on their bottom lines. We were encouraged to applaud successful greed and condemn failure to be greedy enough.

A house divided cannot stand. When we aligned our values with "turn the bull loose" capitalism by destroying social supports and public education, we created an entire underclass of exploited citizens, the resentment rose between the have a little and have nothings, we decided to compete against one another instead of cooperating as a society would, and now a lot of us have a zero sum mindset of "If someone else is losing, that must mean there's more for me!"

The happiest nations on Earth are heavily taxed because everyone in those societies understand that their society rises or falls together. That is a foreign concept in the United States, with the have everything's having no allegiance to the society that facilitates their succes, they just want to take while giving nothing back, and with the power their wealth provides, they're permitted to.

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/happiness/

Everything will continue to decline until we reign in our greed class and stop them from dividing us with the bully pulpit of all major media that they own toxifying everything we see with social wedges to keep us divided so we don't look up.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/18/the-wealthiest-10percent-of-americans-own-a-record-89percent-of-all-us-stocks.html

This is not a society anymore, it's a bunch of rugged individuals at each other's throats with a tiny owner class using their power to maintain that hatred and division to maximize private profit because their greed is insatiable. All this suffering, because a handful of asshole families with unethical levels of wealth demand to trade humanity for ever more currency, disgusting.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

You seem to have a grasp of the root of the problems. Please contribute more to share your view. I appreciate it. I’m surprised America is 16 on the index.

[–] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago

My exact thought. Communities were stronger when people could feel secure in their home and livelihood, when they had enough free time to actually be a community. Finance ghouls hollowed out the industrial base of the country, neoliberal politicians (republicans and democrats both) gutted the labor movement, and fossil fuel companies and their handmaidens in the auto industry brought us a world where most people have to drive everywhere they go.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Like all liberals, she misses the point - if it isn't anti capitalist, it isn't helping.
Especially when it comes to discussion of alienation which is a feature of capitalism, not a bug.

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it is a feature of capitalism why is it not found in all capitalist systems? Why did it take centuries to come about?

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You not willing to see a thing because it doesn't fit in with your narrow and wilfully ignorant world view, doesn't mean it isn't there.

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You know nothing about me so your presumptions are at best an indication of poor reasoning.

This isn't happening in all capitalist nations and absolutely happens in non-capitalist cultures. The collapse of communities can happen for many reasons. For the USA, which has traditionally been very religious, I suspect much if it has to do with people not forming communities to replace the religious ones previous generations had.

I get that ML circles tend to lead to an extremely narrow focus and discourage independent thought but you can choose to not be "that guy". As a Marxist you probably shouldn't be calling anyone's world view "ignorant" given the history of Marxism's failures.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This video might explain things better.

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Youtube is never a good source for academic discussions. There is no reason to consider the source as having a valid or informed opinion on the issue. Finally, it doesn't address the fact that this happens in other non-capitalist systems and does not happen in all systems.

[–] Tedesche@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

"Aha, someone who disagrees with me and posed a simple question, challenging my claims! ATTACK!!! ATTACK!!! ATTACK!!!"

[–] theodewere@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

if only she could comprehend your magic solution to the problems

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It isn't a lack of comprehension, especially not in someone of her position, it is a reluctance to give up privileges she is well aware she has, even if she wouldn't admit it out loud.

[–] theodewere@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

and you're a mind reader, that's impressive.. but a lot of responsibility..

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, you don't need to read minds, just open your eyes, but sure, whatever...

[–] theodewere@kbin.social -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i honor your spirit, Storm of Desserts.. whether you are apple crumb, or blueberry tart.. i don't care which flavor you choose..

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] theodewere@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] theodewere@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

what a weirdo

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

She knows exactly what the problem is, she just chooses to think the system can be reformed. A common misconception. Marxists would call her a class traitor.

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Extroverts thinking we need to be around one another again. blech

[–] Fisk400@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You know what is worse? Depressed bed blobs pretending that they are introverts and normalizing antisocial behaviour. Healthy introverts have and regularly meets friends. They just don't do it as often and in the same way as extroverts. I know these things because I went to therapy instead of trying to normalize my insecurities on the internet.

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also, you do know who wrote that article, don't you? As a liberal, I did vote for her, and felt very icky having to do so, but it was (barely) better than the alternative. Before you put her words on that pedestal, ask your therapist if they agree about this brief psychological profile of her:

A psychological analysis of Hillary Clinton — Democratic nominee in the 2016 presidential election — by Rylee Pool and Aubrey Immelman, Ph.D., at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics, revealed that Clinton’s predominant personality patterns are Ambitious/self-serving (a measure of narcissism) and Dominant/controlling, infused with secondary features of the Conscientious/dutiful and Retiring/reserved patterns. In summary, Clinton’s personality composite can be characterized as an adaptive elitist narcissist. http://personality-politics.org/hillary-clinton

Is that someone's world view something you still think is good to promote? She IS the toxic extrovert.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Can you give 3 examples of politicians in the US that don't fit similar (if not identical) behavioral patterns? Just curious.

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago

I think you are projecting. Congrats on the therapy. Do the world a favor and keep going.

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I see you didn't read the article before commenting

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's Hillary, only worth a light skimming. You surprised a social vampire like that gets lonely? Her ego and neediness was so big, it cost us the 2016 election. She deserves to be lonely.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You think she's lonely and not at public events like every other day, surrounded by fans and staff?

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, I don't think she's lonely. She takes care of it by feeding on the souls of others socially & politically. She would be terribly lonely if she didn't have that going for her, hadn't created this form of sustenance for herself.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, cannibalism visuals. Does she eat babies whole?

This is called dehumanization and it's an old fascist tactic. If your political opponent aren't considered human, then, what?

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago

It’s not dehumanizing, her neediness is all too human, and it ended up costing us an election and giving us Trump.

[–] Tedesche@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Interesting article. Too bad it's written by a hypocrite. HRC's campaign was rife with divisive tactics, from labeling a quarter of the country "deplorables," to playing the gender card relentlessly, to colluding with the DNC to hedge out her primary opponent (Sanders).

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 2 points 1 year ago

Not American, so I can't speak for any of that. But this article on its own seems pretty accurate and thought provoking