891
Almost 40% think Australia should dump US alliance if Donald Trump returns as president, poll finds
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
891 points (96.9% liked)
World News
38705 readers
9 users here now
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.
-
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's not what I said, at all.
Also, lol.
Why don't you read through my comment history and tell me again how I'm regurgitating standard GOP drivel.
It's not what you said, it's what you implied with what you said.
And yes, you do not lean GOP. But the entire point of that apathy is specifically to target non-GOP voters to keep them from voting- so it would be entirely expected to see that sort of accidental encouragement of apathy from a non-GOP poster, and all the more important to call it out because unlike someone who votes R, you would see the importance of shaking off that false apathy and voting.
Maybe you should take a breather, and then come back and reread my comments in this thread.
You're projecting your own meaning or intonations into my words because you've cast a moral judgement on who I am, or what my intent is. Not only were you wrong, but you keep inserting your morality into questions of foreign policy, just like I warned about in my main comment.
In some threads, I'll absolutely insert my political views and opinions, in this thread I have stuck to neutral analysis, mostly on the realities of geopolitics and foreign policy.
More than once I have even said that Trump was a unique threat who could create the conditions that everyone here is chirping about. However, I also made clear that the act of his reelection alone would not be enough for countries like Australia to end their alliance with America.
Now, because I think you mean well, I won't spend the time pointing out the numerous logical fallacies you've used to attack me.
So, if you disagree with anything I've actually said, please share. But please leave out your projections of what you think my secret nefarious intentions really are, or attacks based around logical fallacies.
I think you may also want to consider a breather. I'm not attacking you, I'm not accusing you of nefarious intentions, and I'm not casting judgements.
I'm pointing out that, regardless of if you're advocating it or not, you are inadvertently supporting the idea that voter apathy is acceptable. You're not doing it outright, and that's not what you're trying to do, I get that. You're trying to neutrally state that regardless of what happens, it takes more than one presidential change to cause geopolitical changes on the scale Australia is threatening.
Now, I actually disagree with that point that in general, I feel we've seen our allies distance themselves or even break off with us in Trump's first (and hopefully only) presidency, but that's not actually what we're discussing here anyway and I don't think either of us really care to dig into the weeds there, because it involves a scenario I think both of us hope won't happen.
My point is more that, as someone who cannot read minds, I can't tell if that language is coming in as a complete coincidental accident, it's something you accidentally picked up from GOP propaganda pointed directly at your demographic (which is most likely imo), or you're intentionally spreading it (highly unlikely, given your post history). But regardless of what you're intending to say, what you're actually saying gives a feeling of 'calm down, it's not a big deal, trump winning isn't a huge catastrophe to democracy, it'll be fine, any damage he can cause will be limited.'
And that happens to directly be a piece of GOP propaganda to encourage non-GOP voters not to vote, because voter suppression and low voter turnout helps the GOP.
Again, I'm not saying you're doing it intentionally, or even registering it. I'm not saying it's some nefarious plan, and I'm not blaming you. I'm pointing out that there is unconscious bias in what you're saying. Admittedly I was first trying to point out that bias to anyone reading, which probably looked combative to you, so my bad for that.