A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
If "Vote for Educated Leaders" is truly a controversial statement, then we're all fucked.
Your leaders absolutely should be educated, not even necessarily in politics, but Bob next door who's only got two neurons in his head fighting for third place shouldn't be leading any country
The indian PM has a controversial masters degree ( mostly a fake one), so when someone says vote for educated people , he feels its an personal attack on him and his party !
You forgot to name the prestigious degree: "Entire Political Science"
Did you just wake up from hypersleep? We definitely are fucked my guy.
Can I hypersleep until we make our way round to not being fucked?
It’s so incredibly sad how adults need to be reminded and told to vote for people that have a background with real education. I can’t believe people don’t care about education when it comes to voting for someone to be put in your government. I feel sorry for those people who don’t. You know it’s the people who don’t that have lives that revolve around politics and consume it everyday
Very telling (and not without reason) that just reading the headline creates an automatic assumption that this occurred in a US "red" state.
I definitely read the headline and thought "please don't be my state again"
Can you explain why?
(I am not from US)
The US republican/trump/conservative (known collectively as Nazi's) followers are historically against education. These people are currently promoting a religious inquisition to eliminate books and curriculum in schools that they feel do not align with their hate based religious and intolerant beliefs. Teachers and librarians are being physically threatened and fired for refusing to comply with the book bans and twisted educational mandates. The politicians that populate the groups I mentioned are not considered smart themselves (like stating wind generators were a threat because they would use up all the wind eventually) so advising children to vote for educated politicians threatens their one and only goal, the retention and accumulation of more power.
Around 40% of Indian politicians are only educated up to school (stat might have changed), and the ruling party is quite dystopian in silencing narratives that go against it.
Sorry, but what does "up to school" mean? (I am American, and many of our education groups are schools.) Is that school prior to college, ending near age 18, or something else?
Edit: thank you, I now understand
till 10th grade (GED equivlent i guess.)
Upto age of 16 or might include upto 18
I mean if he chose to communicate his preference, that's a problem. But "Vote for educated leaders" shouldn't be exactly controversial. If you're angry, is it because you know the ppl that you voted for are uneducated?
Teacher fired for promoting education. Got it.
Stop voting for fascists just because they blame all your problems on marginalized people, already.
It feels like we've been devolving as a species for the last 20 years or so, I'm pretty tired of living in interesting times.
I'd love to see those who disagree with his statement answer the question "when is a good time to not vote for educated leaders?" that applies more than 0.01% of the time.
Even religious people shouldn't disagree with it. If you want someone with religious background in then you want them to be educated in matters to do with that religion. That they themselves don't consider that education is telling.
It’s really telling when politicians feel attacked by such a statement.