politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
It's not the same country. They're not the same people.
I would argue it's the same country and the same people. Capitalism was the guiding principle then it is the same now.
Why else would you not have universal suffrage, don't banish slavery, not conduct genocide, other than to concentrate power in hands of few while continuing exploitation of everyone.
Back then they were building the system for 'the betterment of all', hence what you mentioned. Now they're exploiting the system for personal gain, or to secure what they've already grifted, hence what you have today.
How can giving voting rights to only land owning elites be for the 'betterment of all'? How is disenfranchising the majority for the 'betterment of all'? Even if we don't count the slaves, how is not giving voting rights to women and poor for the 'betterment of all''? How is it any different from what is happening today, where people's voting rights are being taken away other than the reasons? It was people wouldn't know what's better for them, now it is fake votes.
One could argue that as a fledgeling country early politicians did need the support of the rich slave owners. But it didn't take 76 years to build the country. Secondly how it is different than politicians doing the dirty work for the corporate for their election today?
There is no way one could spin up a fantasy where genocide of indigenous people was for the 'betterment of all'.
Maybe back then people could have a good faith discussion without having to decide if the other person was a supporter of genocide. Like I said, different world, different people.
Please don't misunderstand I never meant you were supporting genocide. What I meant was the framers had in their mind genocide when the constitution was made.
George Washington was a prospector and his motivation, in part if not whole, was the British restriction against surveying and annexing Indian lands.