this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2025
472 points (99.6% liked)

politics

26537 readers
2349 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
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -5 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

and they exist, in large part, because articles like this normalize it.

congratulations in defending part of the problem.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 hours ago

Hard disagree, those types of stereotypes are established in youth long before the kids start reading articles.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

they exist, in large part, because articles like this normalize it

This complaint is missing the forest for trees.

Special classes of people have existed for as long as civilization has exited. Leaders and followers, kings and peasants, the wealthy and the poor, etc. As animals, it's in the nature of some of us to desire a greater share of resources and luxury at the cost of depriving others from having the same.

An article repeating the notion of people with specific skin tones are part of a privileged class isn't the problem, it's just a symptom of the problem. The problem is the bigots who put that into practice, singling out and causing problems for people with specific tones while providing benefits to those with other specific tones. Getting rid of public acknowledgement about class disparity isn't going to get rid of class disparity, it's just going to get rid of discussion about class disparity. The racists will still be there, being racist.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Getting rid of public acknowledgement about class disparity isn’t going to get rid of class disparity,

that article isn't recognizing class disparity, though. it's perpetuating and normalizing it. and yes, the people that are bigots are absolutely also part of the problem. the media is complicit in that, though, including that article.