This is a subverse designed to encourage adult discussion spanning the entirety of the political spectrum. All are welcome, from Libertarians to Authoritarians, Democrats to Republicans, An Caps to Anarchists, Socialists to Fascists to Communists, Green, Blue, Black, White, Purple with Yellow Polka dots, whatever color, persuasion, or affiliation, this is a place for you to post your thoughts, articles, and engage in discussion meant to foster understanding.
Politics is best when we try to avoid personal attacks, limits on discussion, censorship, trolling, shilling, racism, homophobia, antisemitism, or any other forms of bigotry and malfeasance.
Election 2020 Politics Sticky
Politics 2017 Christmas Theme sticky
Nov 2016 sticky on new CSS
This subverse belongs to the community of users. Users are invited to post meta-threads about v/politics and I will gladly sticky them. @flyawayhigh
Use the "Report Spam" link to report spam and someone will review the report. J-mods have the ability to remove duplicate noncommercial spam.
v/politics is for all politics.
v/uspolitics is for US politics only.
v/worldpolitics is for international or non-US politics.
v/politicalnews is dedicated to virtually censor-free politics and news
v/news is for news around the world.
v/usnews is for domestic news only.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Kurplow 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
You make a fair point, that anti-capitalists might use this to serve their own goals. Global capitalism contributes significantly to carbon emissions, being the argument.
However, doubting science based on that concern is to likewise insert politics into the conversation.
I'm not sure I was wrong to insert politics into the conversation when discussing a presidential candidate's views on science. Are we really expected to think his views are not politically motivated?
[–] Moonbat 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
No; and after I wrote that I even thought about the silliness of accusing somebody of injecting politics into a conversation in /v/politics.
I just sometimes feel the need to provide a little pushback, because it irks me that what should be science is so often used for political ends that may have nothing to do with the climate. Both sides are guilty - one side of exaggerating the problem, the other of denying it altogether.