this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2025
604 points (98.7% liked)

politics

25259 readers
2121 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
 

During the agents’ violent attack on a delivery worker Saturday morning in DC, bystanders repeatedly demanded the agents share their badge numbers. One of them—his face fully obscured by a black balaklava—eventually shot back, “Do I have to answer to you?”

“You guys are ruining this country. You know that, right?” one bystander said to the agents at one point during the incident. An agent, ironically clad in a rainbow face mask, replied “Liberals already ruined it.”

_

Last week on stage at the Netroots conference in New Orleans, I spoke with Congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-IL) about ICE: specifically that she believes it should be abolished. It’s a stance that’s considered far left, but after witnessing ICE and other federal agents in DC this week, abolishing ICE should be the baseline Democratic position.

“ICE is a terrorist organization,” Ramirez told me. “It needs to be defunded and needs to be abolished.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

These guys are total pussies. Either shoot them or unmask them. They are already on camera so swarm them and pull down a few masks. Once you ID a few of them publicly, the rest will drop like flies.

[–] jason@discuss.online 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Could turn facial recognition back on them...

[–] TheMinister@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 day ago
[–] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

And lose your jobs, your homes, and your freedom in the process as you get prosecuted for assaulting federal agents where the authorities have an incentive to make an example out of you to deter future incidents.

I'm not expecting the world to change from holding hands and singing hymns, but insulting people (who already started confronting them instead of just pretending not to see) for not sacrificing more than I'd have to seems rather narrow-minded to me.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You’re going to lose all those things anyway.

[–] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If this continues unopposed, yes, but asking individuals in specific situations to sacrifice their own lives without an organized community does not sound reasonable to me.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Considering the mass surveillance well underway, the window to organize effectively has already closed. Doing so puts you in as much danger unmasking an agent and in this scenario they will just slap the terrorism label on it and that’s the end of the conversation.

It’s preferable to mass organize but it’s too late now. Keep fighting. We are going to lose but we are going to make this as difficult and expensive as possible anyway. They don’t get to be comfortable.

[–] BaroqueBobby@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We’re not gonna lose, these fucks always fall apart sooner or later. Authoritarianism always falls.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago

Yes, it does, but only the survivors benefit from its collapse. What makes you so confident that you will survive when many others will not?

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Then do it in a big enough group that they wont dare prosecute you and show how many people opposed them, or try to isolate you and show how weak they are.

[–] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Making large groups of people that all agree with you spontaneously appear at a location is typically not super easy.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

True! But everyone hates ice.

[–] Pelicanen@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, a large percentage of the voting population seems to support them, which is part of how we got here in the first place. The best argument for a free and open democracy is what happens with any of the alternatives, but people have a tendency to forget, and opportunists are great at using difficult times to garner support.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Go the fuck outside.

Everyone hates ice. The people who don't are afraid of outside.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

A Quinnipiac University poll showed voters disapproved of how ICE was enforcing immigration laws, 57% to 39%. ICE’s numbers on immigration were even slightly worse than Trump’s.

An NPR-PBS News-Marist College poll last month showed 54% of Americans said ICE had “gone too far” in enforcing immigration laws.

And a CNN poll released last weekend showed Americans opposed Trump’s expanded ICE funding, 53-31%.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/23/politics/ice-unpopularity-trump-analysis

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

No one wants to shoot anyone. We're not murderers. So here we are, needing to think of some other way, and no one has ideas.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 14 hours ago

Healthy people don’t WANT to murder people. But we are being backed into a corner. Are you willing to die for decorum or fight?