“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”

Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.

-1 points
*

If only Biden was in power right now. And he could abuse his kingly powers to remove the kingly powers and restore Democracy.

But of course this is an amazing carrot to keep everyone voting for Genocide Joe. Just like how Obama refused to encode Roe v Wade to use it as a carrot in the elections.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Sorry mate this is just bonkers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points
*

jEnOsIdE

Edit: like that’s what defines him and not all american presidents since decades. Grow up and critic the man for what he’s different in at least.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
*

Blue MAGA doesn’t believe in Genocide of course.

Biden: What’s happening in Gaza ‘is not genocide’

President Joe Biden on Monday sought to reassure Jewish voters that he stands firmly with Israel, calling for the full defeat of Hamas and denouncing the International Criminal Court’s assertion that Israel’s leaders are guilty of war crimes for their campaign in Gaza.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Because the president had unilateral authority to make laws, right?

Nevermind Mitch McConnell standing up in the senate and saying they’d refuse to cooperate with Obama, it’s Obama’s fault.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah that’s how it works, a magic wand

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Have you heard of the congress… You know, the legislation branch of the USA?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

We need someone that will use every tool at their disposal to stop trump.

Biden has shown time and time again, that’s he’s just not willing to do that.

Stopping trump is more important than Biden, if he won’t fight, and he won’t get out of the way, and the party won’t force him to…

It’s time to ask why we still support the party. The voters are the irreplaceable part, not the party.

permalink
report
reply
-3 points
*

“In my view, we need a strong Republican Party. We need a Republican Party that’s united.”

-Joe Biden (~2011)

The man is just incompetent and nostalgic for the “good old days” when Dems and Republicans would play grab ass together and hoodwink the public together to protect the status quo and grow the wealth divide. This whole fascism thing, though clearly signaled decades ago, has him scratching his head. He simply doesn’t get it and is too mentally calcified to keep up with the paradigm shift in politics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

You grabbed a completely out of context quote from 13-14 years ago as you complain that he is nostalgic (for what…?)

Where do I begin?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

It’s not out of context, it’s exactly what he said and meant. And he’s repeated that sentiment on multiple occassions.

If you need a more recent example to ignore, in 2022 he attempted to make some kind of distinction between MAGA and non-MAGA republicans because he still is dumb enough to believe there’s some contingent within the GOP that’s not fully onboard with fascism. Even after the decades of lies and double-dealing, of Republicans pushing to capture the courts and voting consistently to strip Americans of their rights, it hasn’t sunk in. Not even after January 6, after the whole party united behind Trump.

He actually thinks there needs to be a balance between “good” Republicans and Democrats, which is a deeply idiotic notion at this point and betrays the fact that he doesn’t actually want to achieve any of the progressive policy he cribbed off Sanders to win in 2020.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Wasnt trump still a Democrat back then? It’s like people never change…wait …

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Biden hasn’t changed though. He’s still the same old pro-austerity, pro-corporate, “respectably racist” Republican-at-heart conservative he’s always been. You just can’t see it because Trump is so much more extreme.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

The problem with that, is now “every tool at their disposal to stop trump” is an object lesson in exactly what Biden is talking about.

‘Every tool’ means Every tool

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Biden could have expanded the courts 4 years ago, but he didnt.

This could have never happened.

Roe vs Wade could still be standing.

So much shit could be better, but Biden didn’t want to fight.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Biden could not have expanded the court. That requires an act of Congress. Even if the Democrats passed such an act in the House, it would have been dead in the Senate because they have never had the needed supermajority and none of the Republicans would have voted for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
307 points

Then fucking do something about it Joe! The DNC has been little more than passive observers to the raise of fascism.

permalink
report
reply
33 points

“The DNC” doesn’t do what you think it does.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

It doesn’t do what it should.

The point of the party is supposed to be long-term strategy and putting the platform over any one person.

When people talk about what the DNC should be doing, it’s not some “gotchya” to point out that they’re not doing their job and leadership needs replaced.

It’s just proving their point

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So because the National Committee’s short and long term strategy is not what you’d be doing, you think they’re not doing anything.

Do you do any local political organizing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
80 points

Since we’re talking about a SCOTUS ruling, it would be on Congress to pass legislation.

And to follow up on @teodor_from_achewood@lemmy.world’s comment, the Democratic National Committee is a private party organization that supports Democratic candidates in elections. They have nothing to do with passing legislation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Still. The DNC has systems in place to decide who to back in elections to pass legislation. Their messaging since 2015 has been embarrassing. They keep courting moderate conservatives that don’t exist and ignoring unrepresented potential voters who do. They talk about how they win elections when there’s good turn out without ever analyzing which candidates encourage high turnout. Americans want to feel represented in politics and we don’t. The Democrats need to do something that would weaken the democrat party but would weaken the Republican party more: they need to actively begin dismantling the two party system. We want election reform. We want the police to not be a hostile force against the general populace. We want the society we live in to benefit everyone and not just the kinds of people who can afford to finance an election campaign.

The polling exists. We all know that neither party represents or enacts what the people want do. The Democrats refuse to look around and see what’s happening, preferring to rearrange the deck chairs as the ship sinks because that’s the only thing they know to do. And you know? I can’t really blame them. We the people have also been rearranging the deck chairs. We live in a country that only benefits the top but we all still show up to do our duties without looking at what’s going on in other countries where the people are standing up to their authoritarian oppressors.

The worst part is the fascists know what they’re doing. They know to decay the structure by raising the temperature because we’ve become too complacent. We need to stand up to fascism in a way that we haven’t ever since McArthyism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The DNC has systems in place to decide who to back in elections to pass legislation.

No it does not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

No, Congress cannot pass legislation on this matter. The ruling says that the Constitution itself grants the President immunity, so it would take a Constitutional amendment to change it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

No, Congress cannot pass legislation on this matter.

Sure they can. They can pass legislation that says “The President of the United States of America does not have criminal immunity from official acts taken as President.”

Once that’s done, a case would have to be identified and charged. The President would need to do something that would be considered a crime, and would be considered an official act, then be charged with that crime. Then it would follow its way through the legal process - district court, appeals court, en banc, eventually landing at the Supreme Court, who would decide whether that legislation was constitutional.

There are plenty of unconstitutional laws still on the books, especially at the state level, “atheists cannot hold public office” is a great example. Of course, those laws are “unenforceable” under normal circumstances; these are not normal circumstances. We’ve seen how the fascists abuse the legal system. It would not surprise me one bit for them to latch on to one of those “still on the books” unconstitutional laws and attempt to enforce it, because throwing wrenches into the machinery is the point.

Using the “atheists cannot hold public office” example, it would be elementary to cause harm to someone’s campaign for elected office just by seeking to enforce an unconstitutional law. Drawing attention to the lack of religious belief in a candidate, forcing said candidate to defend themselves, getting the unwashed masses to go “Yeah! That’s what the law says!” because they’re too fucking stupid to understand that other court rulings have nullified that law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Constitutional amendment

permalink
report
parent
reply
112 points

It’s on Biden to personally demonstrate to SCOTUS just how dangerous the ruling was.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-28 points

I deeply disagree with this take. If we actually care about the Constitution and upholding what it stands for, then we have to work to undo the damage caused by this race to the bottom, not participate in it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
69 points

By calling for drone strikes on SCOTUS, yes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

They have nothing to do with passing legislation.

Get the fuck out of here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

This is an interpretation of the constitution, so what congress needs to do it to amend the constitution to explicitly state the president is not immune, and good luck getting that through

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

They can amend it or they can pass law citing a different part of the constitution or other judicial precedent, then if it gets challenged the Supreme Court would have to rule on the constitutionality of it’s latest legal justification.

Hopefully after we replace six justices.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Some might call them enablers at this point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
116 points
*

Dumbass and spineless Biden and Democrats. The supreme court literally just started that America had a king but this dumbass party would rather take some stupid fucking high road bullshit instead of playing the game to ensure the fascist fuck around and find out.

They don’t even have to resort to assassinations, they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities, or tell the justice department to focus on domestic terrorism and corruption to fuck over Republican groups and representatives, or tell the FDA to allow the sale of raw milk.

Play the god damn game and be the fucking king if these corrupt justice says there’s a king.

permalink
report
reply
46 points
*

That is a guaranteed path to fascism.

I’m not gonna say that the chances are good, but if they refuse, and win, and then walk back the changes, maybe fascism can be averted.

If they walk into using these tools and normalise them even more, then when the other party gets the government again, you get a republican fascist, and if the other party never gets the government again, it’s because you got a “democrat” fascist.

Don’t race to the bottom, everyone loses there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

So fascist powers for the fascists, but not for the non-fascists.

Get rid of all thet right now with whatever means IMO.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points

You can’t beat fascism by becoming fascist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

then walk back the changes

When have the Democrats ever shown us that they’ll do that?

Roe? Voting Rights act? Hell, a Republican had to save ObamaCare.

Democrats aren’t going to save us from FASCISM. The sooner everyone realizes this, the more prepared we’ll be to fight against it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Well we have a 2 party system, and that ain’t changing. So if not the Democrats, who?

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points
*

No, you use the fascist power granted by fascists to abuse the fascists who granted it in the first place. Power is the only thing that stops fascists. Start with a few nights in a black site for the justices who thought granting absolute power to the president was OK. If scotus already accepts fascism from their team it’s already too late for your plan to work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

I honestly don’t know why anyone is strategising as if they’re on the same side as dems or any politician. I’m not even convinced we have a common enemy in Trump, because they don’t seem serious about beating him.

The question you should ask when voting is “Who is my preferred enemy?” Biden won’t abuse the carte blanche immunity from criminal prosecution? Great, sounds like he’s the weaker enemy, so vote for him. Force him to keep the position he clearly doesn’t want. Force him to disappoint his base for another four years.

While he’s doing that, get to work building alternatives that meet people’s needs from the bottom up and wean them off of this criminal system, to undermine it and prepare people to thrive as it crumbles.

The great thing about this political theory of change is that it’s the same regardless of who’s in power. It decouples you from the capricious, disempowering shifts of electoral politics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points
*

Theater needs to keep going.

Both sides are the same.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Sounds dumber everytime you say it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*

But is he wrong? From Nixon, to Reagan, to Newt GIngrich, to Mitch McConnell to Trump, the Democrats have been feckless and refused to halt this march to fascism. They are complicit by tacit acceptance. This need to adhere to some vague Status Quo (Capitalist Donor Class) is why we are in this situation. It’s time to wake up and realize the Marxists were right all along. You can’t compromise with Capitalism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

Can’t possibly sound dumber than people still buying this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

Ah yes not understanding the small cultural differences of minority policies being used to pretend the difference between the sides while on the broader spectrum being the exact same. Not to forget when it comes to foreign affairs all brown people rights go out of the window.

If both sides weren’t the same the Dems would make an effort to save the things you mentioned above. They’re not doing that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

they could really tell the IRS to audit 501© and remove their status from the churches and bullshit Republican charities

That would be juuuuuust about the dumbest thing they could possibly do. It would mobilize gigantic swaths of voters who are heavily invested in rhetoric over fact-checking.

Doing away with Roe mobilized many of those voters who could be considered to be fence sitters towards the left. Removing church tax exemptions would move them right back and it would do NOTHING to solve the problem, because while the actual big offenders are happily USING the hell out of that tax exemption, they’re rich enough that they’ll get along fine without it.

It WOULD hurt a whole lot of TINY churches that employ 1-50 people per church and actually do community work, though. All of those would go away. That’s a LOT of rural food shelves.

I’m largely against the religious tax exemption, but that’s a problem we should worry about AFTER we can replace the nationwide infrastructure we’d be dismantling by doing so with something at least as effective as what’s there now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

It also screws over the many churches or other religious organizations that genuinely do good for their communities

permalink
report
parent
reply
232 points

He’s so pissed about it he’s gonna do absolutely nothing!

permalink
report
reply
-57 points
*

You apparently want him to do illegal things because he can now get away with it?

edit: are basic norms being downvoted here because if republicans are corrupt af, we should not have any standards either?

Edit 2: you’re not teaching me anything by telling me the Republicans did something more fucked up first. Do you people honestly think Biden would/could murder political opponents. He obviously won’t. He shouldn’t. Jfc

Edit 3: yup I’m totally saying let’s do nothing about this. You people are brilliant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

“Illegal” my left asshole.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

How many assholes do you have?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You’re wasting your time, Best Friend.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

I will consider this harassment and report you if you do this again

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Look in the mirror, dawg

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

But they’re not illegal things according to the highest court in the nation. That’s the entire point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points
*

That doesn’t matter. I understand that premise and yet it still doesn’t matter

permalink
report
parent
reply
97 points

Apparently “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal” is now law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

So again it’s now a matter of “what is allowed” vs “what is ethical or moral”…

We all joke about the high road of democratic vs gop approaches. But how much does the difference matter?

The hard part is we all get it, Biden is now technically allowed to do whatever. Is that a reason to immediately do the worst possible thing?

Should he now cast aside the law and commit hate crimes purely to prove a point?

The courts will never allow such a performative action, but they’ll allow the creep of fascism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Turns out Nixon was right this whole time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Does this mean a president can make their tax filing an official act?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

The only thing you’re interested in is showing how much of a bigger person you are on the internet. What we’re doing is speaking about all the ways this is fucked up and hypotheticals about how it can go wrong. For a lot of us, this isn’t new. I my political life time alone, I saw 8 years of rights being eroded by the Bush II administration with no real push back and once Obama got in under the promise of fixing things, a whole lot of inaction on rolling back any of the rights violations.

The powers that be are taking advantage of how distributed the responsibilities of government are. If it’s so easy to lose rights, why is it so hard to gain them back. There’s always someone else to point at for why that is the case. In Nazi Germany, that was called The Banality of Evil. I see that everyday when some injustice is hand waved away as being too ingrained to do anything about. Police Reform? Too hard. Effective Climate Action? It would hurt the economy. The SC is eroding our rights? Have to wait for someone to die or retired(lol).

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

Not murder. I’m not knowledgeable enough to know. I know, no one ever admits this online so it’s probably weird to read

The default assumption is nothing

That is on you

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Protest. We should flood the streets and not go to work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

We know for a fact Trump will use this to abuse his power as much as possible. The high road isn’t sitting down and taking it, it’s using the power that was just handed to you to do something about it. There practically is no such thing as “illegal” now when it comes to the president. Biden doesn’t need to commit murder to make a difference. He could, for example, expand the Supreme Court so the conservatives no longer have the advantage, or cancel student debt to get more supporters, or do anything other than cry about it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Nah, murder is the popular idea here so let’s do that

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

The Judiciary has decided that the Executive must not be beholden to neither the Legislative nor the Judiciary. This is terrible, because it breaks the separation of powers. Now, if only the Executive wasn’t beholden to any of the other powers to force the Judiciary to go back to reason… Oh, wait.

Irony aside: no, this isn’t a matter of not having standards, this is a matter of making sure that democracy is capable of perpetuating itself. If the organism gets infected by a virus that intends to mutate the whole thing into a degenerated parody of itself, it must send its antibodies. Not doing so means letting the last line of defense fall all by itself, which is even against the very spirit of the law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points

I’ve given up on this crowd. You didn’t say do nothing.

This crowd only understands their echo chamber. Unless you are 100% in agreement with them then you must 100% be against them.

In another post I challenged them to give one specific thing Biden can/should do to fix this. They couldn’t even come up with one item.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

In another post I challenged them to give one specific thing Biden can/should do to fix this. They couldn’t even come up with one item.

Nice to run into you again, still posting this tired line huh? And you’re lying, because not only did I provide specifics, so did multiple other people (there’s more than just these, I’ve seen a ton). It seems that you might be caught in some sort of personal echo chamber.

Is there a reason you stop responding to people once they provide specifics?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

Unless you are 100% in agreement with them then you must 100% be against them.

I know what you mean. It’s pretty freaking sad. This isn’t facebook, where there’s an 80% chance I have horrid views if you think I might have them. Yet they behave like it’s facebook.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I got one. Present a new bill that says supreme court judges are not for life with no chance to remove them.

Every 4 years on election years, but months before the presidential election, (so maybe spring/summer) they allow the general public to vote on their performance. If they get less than 65% approval rating, they’re out. They’ll be replaced by the new president, technically next year (since the election happens in November, but the inauguration is in January).

So if a court judge is less than 65% popular with the public, they’re gone.

And yes, I see the problem of “but the nation is so divided right now that neither side could get that approval rating, and all 12 judges would just be replaced every 4 years…”

Which is partially by design. We need a system that fundamentally breaks all systems that keep corrupt people in power, and actively discourages the media, and politicians from taking this “us vs them” mentality.

A republican SHOULD be presenting their set of ideas that benefit ALL Americans.

A democrat SHOULD be presenting a different set of opposing ideas that benefit ALL Americans.

And the public should vote on what will benefit them most. There should be no such thing as career democrats, or career republicans. It should be a free flowing liquid set of ideas that get catagorized as democrat this time, but based on the people in the election, maybe next time you’re catagorized as more republican than the other guy. So, this election you’re republican instead.

Because everybody is so concerned about “The other side”, that everybody forgets one key thing. It may be two sides, but they’re two sides to the same coin. That coin is America. Right now, and for the past 8 years, that coin has been just falling to the ground.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points
*

No, I want him to call their bluff and rise to the challenge of meeting this constitutional crisis. The top court in the land has gone off the rails, and seemingly in collusion with a concerted effort to destroy the rule of law.

Blithely waiting until the election to “let the people defeat Trump” is dereliction. This ruling may be curated in deference for Trump, but unless it is challenged forcefully it will not just go away on January 7th 2024 if Trump loses again. Because when the question of “What are ‘official acts’ v ‘private acts’ then?” comes up, it’ll go right back to the SCotUS the Heritage Foundation and their interpretations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points

It’s a straw man to imply I said we should do “nothing”

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

would you care to elaborate on what you believe should be done about this?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Given that I’m a programmer who hasn’t even had time to think about it I wouldn’t know.

Things that should not be done about it: murder. I can’t tell if the people suggesting that are all joking or not, but it’s sort of shocking if anyone is being serious.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

The precedent shouldn’t be “they go low, we go high”, but “play stupid games, win stupid prizes”. He probably wouldn’t do anything because the aforementioned issue, but should just send an assassination squad on the 6 supreme court judges alongside with other politicians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

You’re suggesting Biden sends a government hit squad to assasinate supreme court judges?

Are you high?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

You’re actually being serious

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Not illegal anymore bucko

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

When the other guy is willing to knife you its no time to stick to the rules of debate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

we should have standards. my standard for a fascist is that he should not exist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They are literally not illegal anymore. He can declare Trump to be a danger and send seal team six to execute him. He can forgive half of all student debt and transfer the other half to an unlucky dude in Oklahoma. He can forbid to be called Joseph to everybody else. He can cancel the elections. Very legal and very cool.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

It’s the tolerance paradox. We can tolerate all except the intolerant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Can you tolerate electoral reform?

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Sure. Why not? It’s not like the next R in office wont do exactly that anyway.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-25 points

Because morality and norms exist whether those corrupt fucks care about them or not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

He needs to act to safeguard our democracy, because others will not have the same hangups in doing the opposite. Acting with the power they have granted him in order to prevent future issues is not corruption.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

I would love to see him detain every scotus justice and stash em in a safe house for their protection/national security. Give them no freedom of movement or agency over their lives… see if they change their tune.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.

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.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 10K

    Monthly active users

  • 8.8K

    Posts

  • 99K

    Comments