this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2025
147 points (97.4% liked)

politics

26807 readers
2787 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
all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 27 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

I still don't understand hating Jews just for their religion. It makes no sense.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 21 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

They hate them because medieval laws allowed Jews to loan money at interest. So the lords and kings would take out the loans to pay for their armies and then incite a pogrom when the loan payment came due.

[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 8 hours ago

I think I remember reading that similar laws placed Jews in other industries seemed as dirty, such as legal and medical fields. By happenstance those ended up being very desirable as society changed. Jews were often persecuted and blamed for a lot of social ills in that era, that, in addition to resisting cultural assimilation, meant they kept in fairly insulated communities, which made it easier to put them in the category of "outsider".

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 16 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

What's even crazier is when you realize the main three (Islam, Judaism, Christianity) all literally worship the same God. They just disagree on prophets.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

I find it hilarious when I say that on various forums and often it's the xtians that usually object that they worship Allah.

Usually I do this in the context of explaining how using the term "God" as a stand-in for their god (meaning: Jehovah/Allah/Yahweh) is so very provincial and presumptuous.

Sometimes I've had a few Jews try to claim that Jehovah/Allah/Yahweh are not the same entity, and also that using the full name of their god is something I should not do because it's "offensive". I realize that xtianity and Islam are both retcons that both claim their legitimacy based on the OT, but for some reason, pointing this obvious fact out is something some people pretend to be offended by. In any case, I point out these rules are for the adherents of book clubs, not for others who have not opted into these book clubs. Being "offended" by someone using the full name of a fictional entity is therefore a choice.

I, for one, refuse to play along with their game of assuming the use of [g|G]od automatically means the Abrahamic one...

[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

the same god

So... Money?

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)
[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

Tribalism, control, and wealth-accumulation?

[–] devolution@lemmy.world 11 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Something something killed Christ. Meh. Vance is such a spineless weasel.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I'm an atheist, so that tracks.

Since Christians believe that Christ died for their sins, wouldn't that ruin their whole shtick if he hadn't been killed?

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 10 points 10 hours ago

Its storytelling to build community, not something rational

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 4 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Maybe two things. Have you spent significant time as an outsider in a way that you couldn't change and wasn't going to change ? Being on the incontrovertible receiving end can make it clearer that the motives are that of being human beings. This is what human beings do.

And religion, though not so important for lots, is still really important to other lots. I would see the blind spot in underestimating the power of religion in the 21st century.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

Yeah... I'm an atheist. From my perspective, religion seems silly at best, and malignant at worst (when used to justify truly evil acts)

[–] BertramDitore@lemmy.zip 18 points 9 hours ago

Yeah, he’s a bigot. Everything he says, the way he snidely talks about underrepresented groups, the disrespect he shows his own family, all done with a glib goading smile that begs for outrage.

I’m not sure why the author felt the need to sanitize Trump’s antisemitism at the same time as illustrating Vance’s, especially when he pretty much describes them the same way. Vanity driven by fear of turning away supporters vs. political cravenness for fear of losing the base. Don’t see much difference when it comes out as hatred for minorities.

Trump has always struggled to denounce anti-Semitism, whether asked to comment on Kanye West or the tiki-torch carriers in Charlottesville. But that always seemed a product of his vanity; he couldn’t stand to speak ill of acolytes. Vance’s refusal or inability to denounce anti-Semitism is more craven—and therefore more disturbing. He’s clearly made the calculation that anti-Semites are part of the Republican Party’s base, and he can’t afford to shunt them to the side as he plots his own presidential bid.

[–] Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 10 hours ago

Wow, I can't believe the admin with deep ties to white supremacy and neo Nazis would support antisemites. Floored.

[–] archonet@lemy.lol 7 points 9 hours ago

Nazis? Supporting antisemitism? Say it ain't so! I suppose next you'll tell me water is wet, the sky is blue, and Donald Trump's a child rapist!

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago

So when does "JD" "Vance" get deported, along with those he invited in? I thought being an antisemite was a deportable offense?

[–] stupe@lemmy.zip 4 points 10 hours ago

The Republican party has always been antisemitic.

[–] BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz -3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

How DARE he Invite people who OPPOSE Bombing Children into the Party! How DARE he Invite people AGAINST Shooting Children for Sport into the Party! If ONLY he allowed in Nazis INSTEAD because Nazis are NOT Anti Semetic anymore and Anyone who calls them that HATES ISRAEL!

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 8 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I think you misunderstood.

The antisemites referenced in the article are not the people falsely labeled as antisemites because they want Israel to stop committing genocide. He's not suddenly pro Palestine. I'm sure Vance hates them too.

The antisemites that Vance is welcoming are real antisemites. Actual Nazis. People who want to murder your Jewish family, friends, and neighbors.

[–] BranBucket@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

TBF the term is tossed around liberally these days. But you are correct, this is the type of antisemite that wants to start a genocide, not the kind that wants to end one.