this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
298 points (97.8% liked)

politics

30100 readers
3272 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kibblebits@quokk.au 2 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

You can’t have communism and billionaires

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 5 points 16 hours ago

Right! Democracy and communism it is!

[–] mlatu@moist.catsweat.com 7 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

you honestly think people turn to communism because they want to become billionaires themself?

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

I don't understand how that's a reply to what you replied to. Did you reply to the right comment?

[–] kibblebits@quokk.au 1 points 13 hours ago

You’re an idiot if you think that’s what I said.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 0 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Of what use, then, are the American Communists?

They serve one function extremely useful to you and to the country, so useful that, if there were no Communists, we would almost be forced to create some. They are a reliable litmus paper for detecting real sources of danger to the Republic.

Communism is so repugnant to almost all Americans, when they are getting along even tolerably well, that one may predict with certainty that any social field or group in which the Communists make real strides in gaining members or acceptance of their doctrines, any such spot is in such bad shape from real and not imaginary social ills that the rest of us should take emergency, drastic action to investigate and correct the trouble.

Unfortunately we are more prone to ignore the sick spot thus disclosed and content ourselves with calling out more cops.

--Robert A. Heinlein, Take Back Your Government

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Heinlein had some ideas, but never consistent ideas.

Starship Troopers was sort of a love letter to fascism, and also the idea of power armor. Most of that book is gushing over how cool power armor could be.

Stranger in a Strange Land was rather anti-authoritarian, but there were some hints at something darker in a few places.

Time Enough for Love is time travel incest porn.

And all of Heinlein's ranting about Communism, which in his day was mostly Leninism.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Take Back Your Government is a nonfiction book about how and why to get involved in politics, primarily at a volunteer level. Lots of it is a historical artifact about how political campaigns worked in the 1940s, but it's also got some great glimpses into Heinlein's ideas about governance and one's individual responsibility to get informed and involved.

Some of my favorite bits:

But why be partisan? Why not vote independently, after an earnest scrutiny of the candidates and issues, for the welfare of the people as a whole? It sounds good and it would be very nice if it would work. It would also be nice if pi were exactly 3.000 instead of a bothersome 3.14159 plus.

There are two reasons, one moral and one practical. The practical reason is this: You simply cannot be effective in politics unless you join in the process of compromise and conciliation whereby free men merge little groups into big groups until they accomplish a government. If you are not partisan you are on your own, everybody is out of step but Johnny, and the chances that you can have any effect on how this country is run are 140,000,000 to one against you.

...and...

We need never be afraid of the vote of informed Americans. It is only the ignorant voter we have to fear, ignorant politically, no matter how fine his house or how expensive his schooling. Such people have never experienced democracy; they have merely enjoyed its benefits. It is hard to explain what democracy is; it is necessary to participate in it to understand it.

The former Berlin businessman I referred to earlier told me that he blamed his own group, people with the time and the money and the opportunity to know better, for what happened to Germany. "We ignored Hitler," he said. "We considered him an unimportant fellow, not quite a gentleman, not of our own class. We considered it just a little bit vulgar to bother with him, to bother with politics at all."

They thought of the government as "They." The only possible route to a clear conscience in politics is to accept political responsibility, either as an active member of the party in power or as an equally active member of the loyal opposition.

...and...

If you believe that laws forbidding gambling, sale of liquor, sale of contraceptives, requiring definite closing hours, enforcing the Sabbath, or any such, are necessary to the welfare of your community, that is your right and I do not ask you to surrender your beliefs or give up your efforts to put over such laws. But remember that such laws are, at most, a preliminary step in doing away with the evils they indict. Moral evils can never be solved by anything as easy as passing laws alone. If you aid in passing such laws without bothering to follow through by digging in to the involved questions of sociology, economics, and psychology which underlie the causes of the evils you are gunning for, you will not only fail to correct the evils you sought to prohibit but will create a dozen new evils as well.

[–] mlatu@moist.catsweat.com 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

i agree, national socialism is not the way.

long live international solidarity.

[–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Drop the national part. Socialism has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in the 20th and 21st centuries.

[–] mlatu@moist.catsweat.com 2 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

did you somehow read my comment as condoning the national part? if so, please explain how you came to that conclusion or simply do everyone a favour and re-read what it says

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 1 points 53 minutes ago

Your comment is talking about national socialism in response to a different comment talking about individual American communists, right?

I gotta say, I don’t really see the connection you made, either.

[–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 hours ago

Both of our comments were pretty straight forward. You seem confused.