this post was submitted on 04 May 2024
256 points (93.2% liked)

politics

19244 readers
2194 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What the fuck are you talking about?

[–] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

"giving up" takes many forms.

[–] JonEFive@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Well yeah, but that's a pretty broad spectrum. Giving up by not participating at all is a higher degree of apathy than "giving up" by realistically evaluating your situation and recognizing that participating in a deeply flawed system will still have a chance of moving the needle in the direction you want it to go, or at least stopping it from moving the other direction.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

Right, so I wouldn't equivocate students protesting staunch support for a genocide as 'giving up'. These are specifically people trying to move the needle of a deeply flawed system.

To quote old song, they're 'young people speaking their minds getting so much resistance from behind.'

[–] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

by realistically evaluating your situation

Your only acceptable measure of that is if I vote for Biden which makes me unable to realistically evaluate my situation by definition. There's no point in making this argument. We aren't going to see things the same way. One of us has to compromise. If you can't see it's moderates and liberals turn to make some serious and material compromises leftwards then you never will.

[–] JonEFive@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. The situation is that you will realistically have two choices for president. Voting for anything other than one of those two choices is effectively pointless as it will have no impact on the outcome except to withhold a vote from one of the two candidates that are going to win.

Anything else that you choose is symbolic at best but effectively meaningless.