this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2026
873 points (99.7% liked)

politics

27586 readers
3240 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
 

So we've gone up from 4th Amendment violations to the 5th Amendment. Soon it'll be 6th, and the 13th is a little shaky.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I think it carries some rhetorical weight. ICE is a political paramilitary organisation and as it serves no legitimate civic or legal function outside of that purpose it's entirely wrapped up IN the politics behind it and attempts to invoke some legitimacy through that. It is because of that political support from some of the populace that such a force can exist and do what it does without uniform discontent and disapproval from the population suffering under their activities.Those particular segments subscribing to those particular politics have, as part of the wider constellation of beliefs, admiration for and an idealistic appreciation of the traditional military and those who are or have been a part of it (as long as they're quiet and don't say anything inconvenient).

When even former or serving military veterans get victimised it does make it look at least a little bit worse to a wider range of people than it otherwise might. ICE supporters will certainly have ideological defences and rationalisations for this, they'll surely rapidly disown military personnel who don't toe the line and attempt to discredit them, but is at least a little bit inconvenient having to do this compared to just cheering on the oppression as part of a righteous attack on undesirable elements as any other victims will be considered.