this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2026
190 points (98.5% liked)

politics

27567 readers
3127 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
 

As authoritarianism accelerates — as government-sanctioned violence becomes more overt in immigration enforcement, in policing, in the open deployment of federal force against civilians, and in the steady erosion of civil rights — people are scrambling for reference points.

But instead of reckoning with the long and violent architecture of U.S. history, much of this searching collapses into racialized tropes and xenophobic reassurance: This isn’t Afghanistan. This isn’t Iran or China. This is America. We have rights. This is a democracy. This isn’t who we are.

These statements are meant to comfort. They are meant to regulate fear, to calm the nervous system with the promise that no matter how bad things get, this country is somehow exempt from the logic of repression. Instead, they reveal how deeply many people still misunderstand both this country and the nature of authoritarian power.

They rest on a dangerous fiction: that large-scale state violence, political terror, and repression belong somewhere else — to “failed states,” to the Global South, to places imagined as perpetually unstable. This is not only historically false; it is how people in the U.S. have been trained not to recognize what is being built in front of them.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Both Sidesing

A Tale of Two Resolutions: 75 Dems Join GOP in Resolution Praising Trump’s Mass Deportation Regime

We have two Democratic Parties - the party aligned with the general public and the party aligned with the national government. If you're voting for Henry Cuellar in the next election cycle, who are you supporting exactly?

[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This article?

I didn't get that at all. This isn't both sidesing any issue. I don't think they even mention Republicans or Democrats/Left or Right even once. It's just holding up a mirror to say this is us.

If anything it should remind people that if you want your America, you need to be ready to shape it by being more aware of the narratives being created. You can still make the America and the future you want by demanding your rights, especially the right to vote.

“This isn’t America,” they insist, as if the U.S. were not a place that has repeatedly refined its methods of control while keeping its hierarchies intact.

If we treat this moment as an exception, we will look for solutions that restore a past that never existed. If we understand it as part of a longer pattern, we can begin to ask better questions: What would safety look like without punishment? Order without domination? Belonging without exclusion? And what would it require to protect one another — not from some imagined future, but from the systems that have always been with us?

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If my opponent is the government and Republicans are really good at getting things done while Democrats are terrible at it, then it makes sense for me to vote for Democrats as they’ll be a weaker opponent.

Both sides are absolutely not the same. One is feckless and spineless so I’d rather fight them.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Biden's Democrats were actually amazing at reversing Trump's policies and bringing in new progressive ones.

You could argue that he got more done then Obama did on his first term.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And even with all that done it still feels like nothing changed, and the next president undid all of that and more.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Trump has the SCOTUS running defense for him.

Trump's been planned out for a long time while they stacked all the courts.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Which just reinforces my position that the Dems are bad at governing and therefore a better opponent for someone who hates government.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I can't argue with that although it was mostly Mitch McConnell that engineered that I'm not sure if the rest of the republicans add up to his level of political savvy.

They don’t have to be good at it. Just better than their opponents.