this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
267 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2529 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 114 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is NOT a purity spiral

Right, because that's exactly what people who are not in a purity spiral say.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I have honestly never that's this term.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Basically, it's a term used for infighting in a group/cult stemming from one or more members being pointed to as straying from the original cause. It often happens when one group sees another group within the same crowd as not pure enough. The first sign of this in this particular context was when Maga started referring to many supportive Republicans as Rinos.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Happened to my grand parents’ church in the 90s. They had this big disagreement over rocks (not joking) and then the infighting tore the church apart. Half of the group left and built their own building across the street and the other half stayed. Neither church ever really recovered from that.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago (2 children)

They had this big disagreement over rocks (not joking)

Please don't leave us hanging on the details

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Probably a disagreement about what kind of rock was best for stoning impure women and children.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

Or for translating golden plates left by ancient Mesoamerican Jews in upstate New York.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

"Are there any women in this crowd?"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

This is why we fought, they're minerals!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Rocks? Was it Church for Geologists? lmao

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

There was a children’s summer program where they painted crosses on rocks and other symbols of faith, like the Jesus fish. They were having the kids hold them in their pockets and hold them while they prayed, like a daily reminder kind of thing but also an arts and crafts idea.

Well, one elder got super pissy about the idea their grandkids were “praying to idols” and got a bunch of parents all hot and bothered. After a bit of handwringing, the church asked the teacher to either step down or leave the church. That triggered the other half of parents who either 1) didn’t see the whole ordeal as such a big problem or 2) liked the teacher and their family. Chaos spiraled from there… all over painted rocks.

Edit: this happened in rural Texas, there wasn’t much going on down there so I’m convinced people did this kind of thing for the mere sport of it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

Amazing that arguments like this were tearing European cities and nations apart 500 years ago. At least this time no one was willing to die for their cause. But you can see how quickly it spirals out of hand.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Hello, fellow mello bellow er!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

And the green party in Sweden. Went from a lefty pro environmental party to some crazy anti everything party.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The term "RINO" is much older than MAGA. I remember hearing about them in the 1980s and 90s, and even then it wasn't like it was a new concept.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Right, but nowhere in the comment you are replying to did the commenter say it was a new term.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

You're right, I read it wrong. My mistake.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Well I think it's more the fact that it became more common to refer to people as RINOs

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah no it was clear from context, just never before publicized to any degree, and a weird term to begin with.