this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
171 points (85.2% liked)

politics

26226 readers
2261 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
[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A bigger outlet repeating the same false claim with the same citation doesn't make it more true. Or are you saying you know the claim is made up and its worth posting anyways as propaganda?

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are you asking whether I've personally audited all the weapons caches ICE might conceivably have access to?

I don't even know if you have a face.

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm asking if you're aware of the fact that the articles you're posting have no basis in fact. ICE has proven 72 million on equipment, an astonishingly large number. There is absolutely no data or anything at all to lead anyone to believe they've purchased "warheads" "guided missiles" or "artillery" as the articles you're posting claim.

Is this disconnect intentional?

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Where's your cape? Or maybe you'd prefer a red robe like the Spanish Inquisition.

"Arguing with strangers on the Internet! That'll improve the world!"

Superhero movies are for douche bags.

[–] Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Sounds like too much work.

[–] assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Even just this conversation is something of a proof. You kept hitting me with that "proof" that ICE's funding is being raised as if would "convince" me of something. You know, being a good debunker trying to realign your "opponents" viewpoint. Correct their values... Where as I wasn't putting half as much effort into my approach.

Just writing my pro-propaganda poerty. Because poetry, art, humor, propaganda is an art form. Science, logic, rationality, skepticism, debunking - they're a science, it's more effort. Take more work. The mindset is more draining. It's subject to more burnout and isolation.

It's a case study. Meanwhile the upvotes for this post don't go away. Nor do the people who didn't see your correction, who just saw the headline and continued on their way (which I suspect is most reddit/lemmy style users, they're doom scrolling).

Now apply this to a whole system of posting accross platforms like the alt-right does ...and a little debunking can't really make a dent in the overall effect.

It's a tool the left can't afford to avoid. It's best seen and done as an art, as comedy, with humour, gloss, and pizazz, like Trump does it. That's what works. Everything's a commercial. An elevator pitch.

I've been a debunker. It only works in a rational society, and only untill the forces of irrationality emmerge again out of emotional need. Propaganda deals with the emotions because people aren't rational.

It's a case study.

[–] Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

Happy for you/sorry that happened.