776
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 385 points 1 year ago

Do NOT call prageru a "university".

[-] DarraignTheSane@lemmy.world 69 points 1 year ago

I don't understand PragerU... they put out all of this fascist propaganda, but they still have this video up on their YouTube channel that spells out in no uncertain terms that the cause of the civil war was slavery and the south's want to defend a "morally repugnant institution":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4

Is this just the one thing they keep out there to point at and say that they're "fair and balanced"?

[-] gramathy@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago

That’s the video they point at when they say the Democratic Party was the party of slavery.

They’re just hypocrites.

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

Historically, it was the democratic party pre 1960s that were the defenders of slavery. Lincoln was a Republican at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation, and the ideologies basically switched around the time of the Civil Rights Act.

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats

[-] ThunderingJerboa@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

I mean yes its a technicality but its also a pointless argument seeing as most political parties aren't the same after 100+ years. Hell even in a span of 20 years, it is quite crazy to see progress since for a while the democrats basically avoided the whole lgbt topic entirely but now is one of its "pillars" for party ideals.

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Exactly, just as conservatism has changed and gotten more extreme in the last 40ish years. My point though is that far too many people treat the political parties as constant throughout their history, and it's worth pointing out that modern iterations of a given party are a stretch from even 20 years ago, almost to the point that they're different parties entirely today.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The ideologies did not switch. The Republican party was more appealing to Protestants, was largely anti-union, etc many other things, but largely was the party of "individualism". The Democratic Party has always been more interventionist- but started to ideologically evolve after FDR. Barry Goldwater and certain other Republicans opposed the 1964 Civil Rights because they argued it was federal overreach. This attracted some Democrats who just went with what ever party they saw as letting them keep being racist, as for actual politicians who switch IIRC Strom Thurmond was the only one(but I may be wrong). But a big part of the "switch"(Carter won in the south the first time, Bill Clinton won a few states in the South, Reagan won traditionally blue areas) is that anti-government interventionism(especially after Reagan) switched from being a more urban thing to a more rural thing. Thats not to suggest that a lot of Republicans didn't pitch their policies in a way to appeal to voters(who may be racist), they did. But the ideologies of the parties didn't swap. Republicans stayed more or less the same, Democrats evolved.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

"Did you know that Lincoln was a Republican?"

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago

Honestly Youtube sucks. I get flagged for "supporting criminal gang activity" because I had a video about Randy Stair that didn't even paint him in a positive light, most youtubers have to say "unalive" because mentioning death gets them demonetized yet PragerU can just straight up say we need to re-enslave black people and the response is "aww shucks"

[-] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

The problem is that social media companies have completely capitulated to fascists, with absolutely zero attempt to put up a fight.

Everyone knows, and I mean literally everyone, that if the rules were enforces fairly on social media then something like 60% of conservatives would have to be banned. They regularly say things that are openly racist, sexist, and incite violence on the reg.

But social media companies only care about money, and to make money they want as many people as possible to show up. So while they know these cesspools exist on their platforms where people say the most heinous shit imagineable, they tolerate it because it makes them money and avoids the big fascist rage party if they fairly enforced their rules.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

The fucked up part is, I have been banned or suspended from a few social media platforms for completely innocuous reasons. Which is just frustrating when I get a 3-month band on Facebook for racism for making a self-deprecating joke about being white, but white supremacist groups are allowed to just openly operate and the people who gave me death threats for being transgender "were found not to be in violation of policies"

[-] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Right before the API changes I got a 1 week ban from reddit for "report abuse."

I reported a post on r/Ukraine that SHOWED A BEHEADING. When I reported that shit it was a full on, uncensored beheading video.

Apparently that's "report abuse" for some fucking reason. But the antisemites who sent me blatant racism? Not enough to bet them banned.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

That's what got me banned but theh decided to make it permanent

[-] Glide@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago

They just sell content to education institutions, nothing more, nothing less. They don't care what that content is for or against, only that someone finds it valuable. It's not about being "fair and balanced"; it's about playing both sides to make as much money as possible.

[-] 4am@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

I mean their founder guy or whoever did a rant about how it’s ok for siblings to fuck and that inbreeding isn’t real, just to give you an idea of what kind of people they actually are…

[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 8 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[-] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Damn, PragerU was a different place 8 years ago.

load more comments (19 replies)
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
776 points (96.1% liked)

politics

19089 readers
1435 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS