You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
42 points

If it’s illegal and all that, yes, they should be held to standard.

But given the fact that this administration likes to slap the word “illegal” on anything they don’t like, was it really? Or is it a boy crying wolf again?

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Did you buy a Tesla? No? Congrats, you are part of the illegal boycott now. President said so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points
*

I didn’t buy a Tesla, no. Yet it is not illegal for me because he’s not my president and he has no legal power over me, even if I’m also indirectly affected by his policies. American defaultism is pretty cringe, imho.

Did you buy one? Because if so you unironically contributed to the mess which allowed the richest man to buy his way into presidency.

See? I can also reply nonsense and immature “gotcha” stuff that has nothing to do with what I originally said as well. 🥸

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

I am agreeing with you here, for fuck’s sake.

This administration likes to call all things it does not like illegal. Like not buying a Tesla.

I agree i could have worded more clearly. But chill out, man.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

American defaultism is pretty cringe, imho.

You’re in a thread about America and Americans are at least the plurality here on Lemmy, if not the majority. Of course in this situation, when you make a statement about the US, people assume you’re from the US. What do you expect? It’s pretty cringe for people to make a big deal out of well founded assumptions being incorrect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

If it’s illegal and all that, yes, they should be held to standard.

The past few years have eroded the meaning of illegal, and even standards. They have even chose to ignore due process.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Nobody should be deported their “legality” shouldn’t matter. Nobody is illegal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Who said they should be deported? And if they are indeed commiting an illegal act under the written law, why shouldn’t they be subject to any consequences for breaking said law?

I don’t agree with authoritarianism, but I won’t defend lawlessness either. These extreme and radical stances from either party are why the US is where it currently is.

I cast my doubt over the the very foundation of the act of imprisoning these people, not if they’re innocent or not. Because without due process everyone is guilty until proven otherwise - and even then not really. I think you missed my entire point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Just out of curiosity, what are some of the “left” stances you feel are extreme or radical?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Stonewall was deemed illegal by the cops that raided it, and that’s the genesis of queer pride.

Sometimes illegal shit is not only okay, but necessary.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

We know it’s a bad situation when the basic elements of the constitution are considered “extreme and radical”

No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

yes no prisons or police should exist. “lawlessness” is a good thing.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 323K

    Comments