this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
254 points (97.7% liked)

politics

30100 readers
2672 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
all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 3 points 1 hour ago

that is a given by now. for billionaires the name of the game is "which politicians are my bitches"

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 16 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

What if we give all billionaires so much money they will become trillionaires ? Will that save democracy?

[–] pigup@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

We can raise taxes on the middle class and cut social services and education!

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 5 hours ago

And don't let people enter the housing market. Just charge them higher and higher rent forever!

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 5 points 11 hours ago

The author they're criticizing, McGinnis, sounds like a real asshole.

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Would unfettered Fascism and Billionaires exist? The leader would just take all their wealth. Look at North Korea.

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

If you could define fascism, you would know that they're very compatible. In fact, liberalism turns to fascism to save capitalists from Consequences™

NK isn't fascist, buddy. Authoritarian, yes. Communist, mostly. Feudal, quite a bit. But not fascist.

Fascism is the marriage of the state and corporations to protect both from growing resentment, using nationalism to distract the public from their actual troubles.

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

Fascism is the marriage of the state and corporations to protect both from growing resentment, using nationalism to distract the public from their actual troubles.

Now I'm not sure if you are trolling because that sounds an awful lot like NK... They don't have corporations like in your definition but they do have very powerful syndicates who influence and manage any internal conflict.

[–] plutopos@lemmy.zip 1 points 8 hours ago

not if the leader is one of them

[–] kibblebits@quokk.au 3 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

You can’t have communism and billionaires

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 5 points 10 hours ago

Right! Democracy and communism it is!

[–] mlatu@moist.catsweat.com 7 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

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

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour 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 7 hours ago

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

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 0 points 13 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 10 hours ago

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.

[–] mlatu@moist.catsweat.com 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

i agree, national socialism is not the way.

long live international solidarity.

[–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 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 7 hours ago (1 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

[–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 hours ago

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