this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
838 points (96.8% liked)

politics

18863 readers
3940 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
[–] ChronosTriggerWarning@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In the past I didn’t mention I was left and all I got to discuss was how evil conservative I am.

Honestly, that is an interesting reaction when you take into consideration that you spout right wing talking points.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

which right wing point did i spout that automatically made me a conservative on all my positions....

[–] ChronosTriggerWarning@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Which position have you vociferously defended aligns with a leftist position..?

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

just to be clear: in order to discuss this one topic, i have to bring up my whole bio and charter first right? Otherwise we cannot engage, correct? The never ending purity testing.

I align with all left positions: social welfare, gun restrictions, etc. But I shouldn't have to justify this in order to have a nuanced conversation with someone. This is the crux of the problem. Not even people on the left can disagree about something as basic as the facts of a case that was broadcasted on national television.

[–] knightly@pawb.social -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

just to be clear: in order to discuss this one topic, i have to bring up my whole bio and charter first right? Otherwise we cannot engage, correct? The never ending purity testing.

I would have preferred if you didn't try to make the discussion about you and stuck to the points you wanted to make, but you did and now you're mad about it. Seems like a "you" problem.

I argue with liberals about gun rights all the time and almost never bother to state my political alignment, yet they never accuse me of being right-wing because my preference for policies like "arm the homeless" and "disarm the police" can't be confused for right-wing ideology.

I align with all left positions: social welfare, gun restrictions, etc. But I shouldn't have to justify this in order to have a nuanced conversation with someone. This is the crux of the problem. Not even people on the left can disagree about something as basic as the facts of a case that was broadcasted on national television.

You don't have to justify yourself, you just feel like you do to because you aren't what you claim to be. Actual leftists argue among themselves about policy all the time, about such niche positions that it might as well take a degree in political theory to tell a Posadist from an Anarcho-Transhumanist. From what you've shared so far, you seem to be a neoliberal, which is a right-wing ideology aligned with the Democrats that only seems "left of center" when the overton window is limited to Democrats and Republicans.

To put it another way, if you didn't want to defend your "left" credentials then you shouldn't have claimed them.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I've brought questions in the past without the credentials thing and the only thing that came of it was how conservative / boot-lucking fascist I am. No matter how I angle myself here I can't ask any questions about the events of that day.

There is no way out of the label tantrum game if you're not lockstep with the full narrative of what happened that day. I tried a different tactic today and obviously it led to the same result. Only this time: poser leftie pretending to be