World News
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 [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Saying that people should mask up is not authoritarian.
When a pandemic is killing thousands a day, and wearing masks is the best solution for everyone, requiring masks in grouped spaces is not authoritarian any more than prohibiting drunk driving because that also has a decent chance of killing others.
Saying they should is not authoritarian, yes. Mandating they do so under penalty of law is.
And for sure, authoritarian measures are sometimes genuinely necessary in strenuous circumstances. But I'm pretty damn confident that if you polled Americans about restoring mask mandates, you would see pretty overwhelming opposition against it. Imposing it despite that would be unquestionably undemocratic, and yes, authoritarian.
Nobody was required to wear masks in their own homes or cars or minding their own business in the open away from others.
I don't see the difference between mask mandates during a pandemic and laws about needing to stop at red lights. Both are there to avoid deaths caused by others, and both are reserved to specific situations that involve interactions with others. There have been zero proposals to expand mask wearing to other diseases, it was an extraordinary event on the scale of the Spanish Flu.
Are basic traffic laws authoritarian?
Is there maybe a middle ground where some laws are necessary because of vast potential harm that can be mitigated by small requirements when interacting with other people that are not authoritarian?
We clearly agree that mitigation of some level of harm is worth reducing people's freedom. The core question is, how do you determine where the line is?
Democracy generally demands that the people have some kind of say here, and the vast majority of Americans would strongly oppose restoring mandates now. I don't think you'd find that level of support for eliminating traffic laws. I'm fairly confident that most people at this point think that masking should be an individual decision and would not support the use of government force to impose their use on others. That might be strongly different from your own view, but that's democracy for you.
I think the majority of people are perfectly fine with a tiny inconvenience of wearing a mask during a mask mandate and there is a loud minority who opposes it because they were riled up by conservative propaganda to oppose minimal and reasonable scientifically based safety measures. It is literally the least that someone could have done to minimize the spread of a disease that ended up killing millions of people.
Opposing masks during the pandemic was the most petty and selfish reaction to the situation. People overwhelmingly took the vaccine once it became available while the loud minority acted like it was going to be mandated when that was never a plan.
Stop projecting your selfish attitude on everyone else.
https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_051822/
Polling from May of last year found only 32% of Americans supported re-instituting restrictions, a number that has undoubtedly decreased significantly in the near year and a half since then.
The support for what you're wanting simply does not exist. People have moved on, whether you call them dumb and selfish for that or not.
Yes, May of last year when vaccines were in full swing and people were relieved we were on a downswing. Note that in the same sentence 4 in 10 supported vaccine mandates.
I don't know why you think I want mask mandates right now just because I am saying that most people are willing to do it when needed. You know, the next pandemic for something that we don't have a vaccine for yet.
The govt telling anyone to do anything is authoritarian.
The issue is if you agree with what the govt is telling you, or not. It's only authoritarian when you disagree.
So laws telling people to keep their hands to themselves in public, to drive under a certain speed in a school zone, and to stop at red lights are authoritarian if the person disagrees. Gotcha.
A child's view of government
I bet you can get fined for a lot of things that negatively impact other people.
You didn't respond to their drunk driving comparison. Is it ok for the government to mandate against drunk driving, and to penalize those who violate it?