this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
54 points (93.5% liked)

politics

19091 readers
3868 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] vovo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't know how you meant your comment. Do you criticise the article?

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I criticise the continued practice of grouping people together based solely on skin color. It's a horribly antiquated practice and we need to move beyond it.

[–] WingedObsidian@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

In an ideal world it wouldn’t matter. However human perception is not perfect and if we ignore color then we ignore equity with its subsequent derivatives. Culturally I one day hope that the world learns move beyond that

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I don't expect people to ignore color, I just don't think we should look only at color. I don't think physical characteristics are irrelevant, but you can't define a group of people by that alone.

Edit: will someone explain to me why this is controversial?

[–] vovo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Off course, but it makes sense to ask that question in the headline regarding Mrs. Hannah-Jones' research.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Are we seriously still, in the year 2024

I was a teenager in the 70's, and I agree, this is NOT the future I dreamed about.