this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
265 points (97.2% liked)

politics

21679 readers
5927 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 15 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Also, once you did one accidental Nazism, someone who's very opposed to Nazis would double-check every future statement to make sure they didn't do that again. You can't make that mistake twice and plead ignorance.

[–] HexadecimalSky@lemmy.world -4 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Eh somewhat, In this day and age every symbol has some meaning and most people might not know it. but also trump wouldnt care, he isn't opposed to nazis.

Agian my comment wasn't saying trump wasn't a nazi, just in this one case he, and the author, seemed to not know the meaning of the symbol. but trump would love a toxicly macho army to oppress gays, so he when/if he finds out he wouldn't care.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 6 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

This applies just fine to the author, who has presumably not been publicly castigated for using Nazi symbolism, but it does not apply to Trump, who has. So he either is not opposed to Nazis so he didn't make any effort to avoid repeating the error or intentionally promoting Nazis, and we shouldn't view those traits as meaningfully different.

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 hours ago

I'm sorry, but no. The author, as a journalist, posting to a publication with editors, does not get a pass about using a very, VERY well known symbol of the Holocaust.

Particularly in a time where the comparisons to that era are flying fast and furious, even if they somehow managed to be that poor a student of history that they somehow missed that, they should have taken the time to at least brush up on that period.

The author knew exactly what they posted and their editors who let it through did too.