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
Oh boy! It's "Cultural Marxism" all over again. I wonder if an incel somewhere is going to use this as a justification for committing mass murder, a la a certain Norwegian.
This should have been a no brainer once these idiots started calling the Baltimore Mayor the "DEI mayor".
These racist, misogynistic, homophobic, and anti-Semitic/islamophobic assholes are always looking for a new dog whistle to use or a new popular thing to corrupt, or even seemingly innocent things to corrupt.
Fuck Nazis and all of their allies and enablers.
The racist dog whistle is now a racist air raid siren.
So Republicans are ok without wheelchair ramps being mandated, or wide doors, or handicap parking spots?
Yes. They actually really love complaining about those things "killing small businesses back in my home town"
I mean… to be fair, they got the W on that one. Obviously the ADA was bipartisan but Bush signed it into law
BUT inclusion is different when you can’t infantalize the disabled. Now we’re talking about able bodied people who they can’t write off as insert insult or slur for people with disabilities here
The disabled community got that win. Bush was forcefed heaping piles of bad publicity by protesting disabled people. They worked damn hard to put that bill in front of him and apply the right kind of pressure to make sure he fucking signed. Sure, he took the win as the politicians always do but that win firmly belongs to the disabled community.
Because 'woke' doesn't have the same feel anymore.
Or the academic version: CRT (critical race theory). Remember when that was the rage among conservatives?
It's like watching an addict keep going after harder and harder hits.
Before that it was cancel culture.
Before that it was virtue signalling.
Republicans are always in search of ways to cause Democrats to cede ground. And Democrats keep falling for it because they love to surrender and call it compromise.
Dude I'm left wing which is why I'm against racist shit like dei. I'm sorry but it was a terrible idea when implemented and it's still terrible.
What idiot thought they'd fix racism with more racism?
I’m left wing let me parrot right wing talking points about how inclusion hurts white people!
It’s not a subtle or clever tactic and it doesn’t fool anyone these days but people still insist on LARPing/concern trolling in comment sections. It’s like a compulsion.
“As the most Lefty Left McLefterson who ever Lefted here’s some right wing talking points I heard on Tucker Carlson’s Twitter show”
Lmao yeah okay pal 🙄
"I'm a black gay guy and I can personally say that Obama did nothing for me, my life only changed a little bit and it was for the worse. Everything is so much better under Trump though. I feel respected - which I never do when democrats are involved."
Dude I'm left wing
Dude I’m left wing
X Doubt
People here want to pretend like only conservatives would dislike DEI but they’re wrong.
I want to live in a world where people think about the color of people’s skin the way they do hair or eye color - which is to say they don’t.
I’m sorry but I will not treat you differently based on the color of your skin.
These are the same people who were pushing “Latinx” meanwhile no one who is actually a part of that community knew what the fuck they were on about. Thankfully it seems to have died pretty quickly.
Of course using DEI as a pejorative or a slur is reactionary, but there are legitimate criticisms of DEI. Diversity, equity, and inclusion sound good on their face, but things get complicated when even a little critical thinking is applied. Diversity of what, exactly? Diversity of culture, beliefs, ideals? Ok, but some cultures have beliefs that DEI proponents might find problematic, like homophobic ideas or sexist ideas. So, clearly, we don't actually want too much diversity of ideals. DEI proponents don't want to be inclusive to people they see as intolerant, so clearly there are limits to diversity and inclusion.
Equity is justice and fairness, but what is considered just and fair can change from culture to culture. If we are a diverse and multicultural country, which culture's conception of justice and fairness do we use to determine what is equitable?
You've misapplied progressive language in such a way as to make me suspect this comment is an example of astroturfing. I almost hope that is the case, because the alternative is that you have allowed ignorance and implicit bias to lead you down a path of self justified racism/bigotry. As the dominant culture, it is not our place to decide to exclude groups of people based on a preconception. Every culture has blindspots. But none of them are absolutes. You tolerate the culture, and try to discourage behavior that is detrimental to the whole. Otherwise we'd ban most religions. Even western ones.
As the dominant culture, it is not our place to decide to exclude groups of people based on a preconception.
I'm not sure progressives are the dominant culture in America, but regardless exclusion based on preconception is not the only kind of exclusion. You can exclude cultures based on behaviors that have demonstrated to lead to unacceptable consequences, and that does include white conservatives. It's clear that liberals believe white, Christian conservative culture is at least partly unacceptable, even dangerous, and yet you insist it be tolerated. This seems, foolish. Especially since those conservatives seem hell bent on destroying your culture. It's like refusing to remove a murderer from your home because that would go against the spirit of inclusion.
Every culture has blindspots. But none of them are absolutes. You tolerate the culture, and try to discourage behavior that is detrimental to the whole. Otherwise we'd ban most religions. Even western ones.
But what you're describing isn't inclusion, it's passive assimilation. Discouraging behaviors you consider detrimental isn't inclusion, it's the opposite. Even if you are not excluding the whole culture, you are excluding part of it. I don't think that's a bad thing, but it's not inclusivity and diversity, it's promoting cultural homogeny, at least homogeny of some core principles. So, even if you don't want to outright ban most religions, even western ones, because that would go against your core principles, you do want to "ban" (albeit not overtly) some aspects of those cultures.
This sounds like armchair/keyboard intellectual semantic circle jerk. It completely ignores history, the effects and affects of that history, and thus the actual present reality that is the result.
If we are a diverse and multicultural country, which culture’s conception of justice and fairness do we use to determine what is equitable?
Def not yours. Playing at intellectual arguments on the level of a high school debate may make you feel good. Beyond that not very helpful and certainly lacking humanity.
I'm not right wing, but I have a general distaste for some people in DEI solely because of their reputation of proactive hatred and shame tactics. See localizers propping up GamerGate 2.0. Literally the most pathetic kinds of nuisances, the ones that will cleanse and sensor all media to fit their agenda but will scream bloody mary if you dare try and censor something they like. Hypocritical drama queens that want to dominate culture so they can mold it as they see fit and won't have it any other way.
For examples of pathetic, see Sweet Baby Inc (censorship, racism, unlawful hiring practices), Veritable Joy Studios (sexism and racism my employees on Twitter), awkwardtheturtle/DrewiePoodle (career online community manager who gets off to reactions from conducting racist and sexist harassment, their ego seems to be the only reason they still wake up in the morning). I feel like I'm forgetting someone, but I'm sure Keffles needs no introduction, none of these even compare to that disgrace.
DEI or not, these sound like people no one should really give a shit what they have to say anyway.
this sounded like the intention from the get go
They need to get their own 3 letter acronym. I suggest DIE. Disorder, Ignorance and Exhaustion, since these seem to be their top 3 exports.