Top products from r/politics

We found 531 product mentions on r/politics. We ranked the 5,501 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/politics:

u/BigBennP · 58 pointsr/politics

You're not going to get a serious answer from the reddit echo chamber. So far you seem to have gotten:

"Her vagina"
"the mainstream media is in the tank for Clinton"
"There are no Clinton supporters on the internet."

So here's what I consider the best arguments in her favor, mostly they're culled from my democratic pol/strategist friends, most of whom are serious Clinton supporters by virtue of where I live:

  1. Whoever gets elected is going to have to deal with a republican congress at least until 2020, if not further. So incremental change is a given. Exactly how much of Bernie's agenda is going to get adopted by a republican congress? How is he going to get it taken up? So what's going to get passed? How is sanders going to deal with a congress that says "lol no" and sends him a budget increasing military funding and cutting welfare? At the end of the day this boils down to the "experience" argument, but there's a twist. Sanders definitely also has a history of legislative accomplishments, but more than a few presidents, Obama included, have shown us that legislative experience doesn't translate to effective leadership from the White House. I'll be frank, it's pretty damn obvious that the Clintons inspired Frank and Clair Underwood from the house of cards. That is, however you care to look at it, a reality. Personal relationships and a willingness to twist arms is what gets legislation through. Inability to work congress has been Obama's greatest failing as president I think. (I'm not saying congress doesn't share the blame, but politics is the art of the possible, more could possibly been done had the situation been better managed).

  2. Clinton had a point when she said she's been the focus of partisan attacks for 10+ years. There's a SHITLOAD of dirt out there, but for the most part it's already been dug up. Think about the shit that Republicans dug up on John Kerry with the swiftboat nonsense, or on OBama with reviewing every single thing Jeremiah wright said, how exactly did it become a controversy that Obama's pastor said "god damn America?". You already largely know what Republicans are going to bring up with Clinton. Where's Bernie Sanders dirt? His personal life is largely unknown, and he's skated by on a northeastern tolerance for social indiscretions and refusing to discuss it. I guarantee you it's not because dirt doesn't exist, and not because it hasn't been dug up, but because it's being held in reserve for the general. Republicans forever tied to tar Obama with the idea that he was Saul Alinksy's protege, some kind of 60's radical reborn. Sanders actually is that 60's radical, and actually calls himself a socialist to boot. There's quite a bit out there of him associating with genuine revolutionary socialists and communists. There's going to be an army of people looking for every photo of everyone Sanders ever associated with and everything bad they said about America. His personal life wont' be off limits either. Did you know Sanders has an adult son that was born out of wedlock? Sure, millenials won't give a damn, but it will be the basis for tens of millions of negative advertising.

  3. Electability. It's popular here to point to head to head polls suggesting Sanders is better able to beat Trump. But those same polls also showed Clinton beating everyone but Kasich. In a hypothetical match up against Trump, Sanders comes out +13 and Clinton comes out +6. But the presidential campaign map matters a lot as well. Sanders did particularly poor among Latinos and African Americans, and does exceedingly well amongst poor white people in largely white (and largely red) states. Sanders tied Oklahoma, and won Wisconsin, West Virginia, New Hampshire and Vermont. Clinton, Among others has won California, New York, Illinois and Florida. Even taking election shenanigans into account, the former aren't going to matter so much in the general election and the latter will.

    They are what they are, but the real question is what are you going to do about them? because when you step outside of the echo chamber, it's pretty obvious that Clinton's going to end up the Nominee. Sanders is fighting the good fight and will carry a liberal platform to the convention, which I think is a very good thing for the party in geneal and the Sanders/Warren wing of the party in particular, but his chance of ending up the nominee at this point is virtually nil unless something radical changes like Clinton actually succumbing to a major scandal or getting criminal charges filed. Then question is then, are you going to succumb to the drawback of a two party system and vote for the lesser of two evils or do something that might result in Trump becoming president? It's easy to say now, how do you think Nader supporters felt in 2001 when Bush took office?

    I would add to this, your question makes the exact same mistake democrats have made for years as it relates to Republican voters. going back to Thomas Frank's Book what's the matter with Kansas and why Obama's comments about clinging to guns and religion caused such a fury on the right even though they're pretty true.

    At its heart, the way people choose political candidate is not 100% logical. People are not robots. The reason political disagreements exists is because people have different priorities. Priorities are not driven solely by logical connections. People choose a candidate based on how they feel about them. Obama won an election (both primary and general) by creating a feeling that he would be different. Trump's winning the republican primary by creating a feeling among disenchanted voters that he's going to come in and make it right, no matter what his background or prior policy preferences were.

    Clinton has done a decent job creating an emotional connection with certain demographics.Women over 40, African Americans, Hispanics. She fails at it markedly among millennials and to some extent among men.

    Not speaking truth to power, but rather telling the truth to the mob, or at least answering a question deliberately asked about what the defenses of clinton are.
u/adlerchen · 11 pointsr/politics

It's actually more heart breaking when you know that basically the entire midwest once once considered the home of radical left politics in the US. As Thomas Frank notes in What's The Matter with Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America:

>I do not want to minimize the change that this represents. Certain parts of the Midwest were once so reliably leftist that the historian Walter Prescott Webb, in his classic 1931 history of the region, pointed to its persistent radicalism as one of the “Mysteries of the Great Plains.” Today the mystery is only heightened; it seems inconceivable that the Midwest was ever thought of as a “radical” place, as anything but the land of the bland, the easy snoozing flyover. Readers in the thirties, on the other hand, would have known instantly what Webb was talking about, since so many of the great political upheavals of their part of the twentieth century were launched from the territory west of the Ohio River. The region as they knew it was what gave the country Socialists like Eugene Debs, fiery progressives like Robert La Follette, and practical unionists like Walter Reuther; it spawned the anarchist IWW and the coldly calculating UAW; and it was periodically convulsed in gargantuan and often bloody industrial disputes. They might even have known that there were once Socialist newspapers in Kansas and Socialist voters in Oklahoma and Socialist mayors in Milwaukee, and that there were radical farmers across the region forever enlisting in militant agrarian organizations with names like the Farmers’ Alliance, or the Farmer-Labor Party, or the Non-Partisan League, or the Farm Holiday Association. And they would surely have been aware that Social Security, the basic element of the liberal welfare state, was largely a product of the midwestern mind.

>Almost all of these associations have evaporated today. That the region’s character has been altered so thoroughly—that so much of the Midwest now regards the welfare state as an alien imposition; that we have trouble even believing there was a time when progressives were described with adjectives like fiery, rather than snooty or bossy or wimpy—has to stand as one of the great reversals of American history.

u/juddweiss · -19 pointsr/politics

Here's a very simple 60 second video:

This is a more in depth, but still very simple and engaging video called The Philosophy of Liberty:

Here's an introduction to Libertarianism by the CATO Institute. I haven't actually read this, but I trust this organization:

Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt is a truly exceptional book and lays out the points so clearly and simply.

And of course there's the Reddit Libertarian community:

Come check us out. We'd love to have intelligent well spoken people like you with us

u/SuperJew113 · 1 pointr/politics

These are 3 examples of significant literary works on American politics written in recent times. And although I only own one, I'm probably going to buy "It's even worse than it looks" I'm pretty sure they attest the asymmetrical polarization of American politics today, that allows extremists to thrive, whereas they couldn't have in previous decades.

The problem with Fox News, is for a major news organization, even they have a mixed record on reporting actual "facts". Edit: To be fair, CNN and MSNBC also sometimes misinform their viewers as well, but not nearly as bad as Fox does.

A study was done that found that people who don't watch news at all, were better informed on factually correct information, than people who religiously watched Fox News. One of our biggest media outlets in the nation, is routinely misinforming it's viewers on matters of national significance.

Most the Right Wing media sources, play on stereotypes and emotionally driven headlines rather than factually reporting the news.

This is why now, in a country that has always honored Freedom of Speech, is now taking issue with "Fake News" making it's way into peoples facebook streams. Because a lot of media sites are now regularly failing to report factually correct information, and it's causing the electorate to vote for candidates who are consistently factually incorrect in what they say. And a major country like the United States, who leaders consistently believe in and base policy off of factually incorrect information, I don't see how that can possibly be good for my country, or the world for that matter.

It is no mere coincidence that for a Conservative party, globally speaking, only in America is the Republicans the only major Conservative party in a Western Democracy, that outright denies the realities of Climate Change.

u/ovoutland · 5 pointsr/politics


>The largely blue collar citizens of Kansas can be counted upon to be a "red" state in any election, voting solidly Republican and possessing a deep animosity toward the left. This, according to author Thomas Frank, is a pretty self-defeating phenomenon, given that the policies of the Republican Party benefit the wealthy and powerful at the great expense of the average worker. According to Frank, the conservative establishment has tricked Kansans, playing up the emotional touchstones of conservatism and perpetuating a sense of a vast liberal empire out to crush traditional values while barely ever discussing the Republicans' actual economic policies and what they mean to the working class. Thus the pro-life Kansas factory worker who listens to Rush Limbaugh will repeatedly vote for the party that is less likely to protect his safety, less likely to protect his job, and less likely to benefit him economically.

u/ExtremsTivianne · 2 pointsr/politics

I took APUSH to and there's actually a number of pitfalls to it. Remember that APUSH is focused towards the AP test, so while everyone else will be starting from the Civil War/WWI to the present, you'll be racing through American History from Columbus to Bush Jr all about a month before you have to take the test. The teachers that take AP responsibilities are good, but the knowledge is still incomplete. If you want to get more knowledge (going through my history BA right now) check out a couple of these resources:

A Peoples History of the United States by Howard Zinn:

In the interest of impartiality, I'll mention the more right leaning version of the People's History, A Patriot's History of the United States: Note that a large amount of it was written not by the centrist historian Michael Allen, but the more politically motivated Larry Schweikart. Regardless, both of these books are used by APUSH classes throughout the country. I'd just pick one.

Also (this is going to sound really stupid) but a series of documentaries entitled A Walk Through the 20th Century with Bill Moyers where LBJs press secretary Bill Moyers talks about history from a perspective that helps us understand what (in general) people were thinking at the time. Here's one episode on youtube:

Finally, if you want to have some entertaining yet deep history, check out Dan Carlin. He has plenty of extremely informative (if slightly editorialized for entertainment purposes) podcasts. His Blueprint for Armageddon series is one of the most intriguing narratives of World War One I've ever seen:

u/wheelward · 1 pointr/politics

The thing is, I think representatives have always been influenced by special interests ever since before the inception of the United States. However, the way in which special interests have influenced representatives has certainly changed through time.

When the Constitution was signed, "we the people" was not meant to include blacks, Indians, women, or indentured servants. The main reason why George Washington was elected as the first president was because he was by far the wealthiest American at the time. And all of those who signed the Constitution has their vested interests.

That's just one example. Right now I'm reading A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn. And he makes it clear that oligarchic powers have always had a heavy influence on policy.

I guess I'm wondering when we were closest to having a representative democracy in the United States. I'm honestly not sure.

u/foodforthoughts · 2 pointsr/politics

If you suspect that you're not getting the whole story from television, I'd suggest picking up Noam Chomsky. He literally wrote the book, Manufacturing Consent, on the propaganda model for analyzing the media. Maybe start with The Common Good or What Uncle Sam Really Wants. That last one was one of the catalysts that started my own ideological transformation around your age that led me to becoming a conscientious objector and leaving the USMC.

Admittedly, Chomsky is a leftist intellectual, a self described supporter of anarcho syndicalism and libertarian socialism, but then, a lot of thinking people gravitate to leftism. Einstein wrote a letter entitled, Why I am a Socialist-

>'The oligarchy of private capital cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organised political society. The members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties financed or influenced by private capitalists. Moreover, private capitalists control the main sources of information (press, radio, education).'

u/Lowbacca1977 · 0 pointsr/politics

Just finished reading a book on this,

In a nutshell, one of the things discussed is that when you look overall, there's 6 qualities people use when defining morality. Care, fairness, liberty, loyalty, authority, and sanctity.

When you look at a very narrow subset, like, say, progressives, you find that they only consider 3 of those important (and even then, primarily care). So much so that they don't comprehend that there could be any other values beyond that, and when experiments have been run, they simply don't know how to answer as if they're conservative. While moderates and conservatives can evaluate questions the way a liberal would pretty well.

Also does a really good job of looking at the biological motivations for this stuff.

u/HelmSplitter · 0 pointsr/politics

I wasn't intending to "hit below the belt" but rather trying to correct you for your own benefit without starting a dick measuring contest.

Despite the cliche, Communism actually doesn't look good on paper. There is no sound economic theory behind communism since it denies the efficiency of a free market. That is to say that it ignores the basics of economics in practice and theory.

Anarcho-capitalism, on the other hand, is based in capitalism. There is no referring to the better nature of people, nor to a harmonious living arrangement for the sake of togetherness. Instead, it's based on sound economic theory of incentives and disincentives. Business is often characterized as a "Darwinian" enterprise. This is only true of directly competing businesses. In actuality, business is more about win-win negotiations between merchants of different fields. Efficiency emerges from market information that only individuals have, and that no single agency (government) could fully collect, analyze, and control the market without decreasing the efficiency by orders of magnitude. (I suggest the book Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt).

>but you also have a large part of the population that is poorly educated, and a large part of the population that wouldn't hesitate to take advantage of that group. I feel that without some sort of regulating body, your system would be the formation of a very corrupt group of people that would gain power over the less informed and easily manipulated without repercussions

First of all, you'll have to define "taking advantage of". Marketing is not coercion. If you mean that they will commit fraud in order to trick people into something, then it seems you completely ignored my statement about social credit, NAP, and DROs. Please take 30 minutes to listen to the podcasts I listed as they will answer your qualms more succinctly than I could in a wall of text.

u/wo_ob · 1 pointr/politics

I'm glad you weren't forced or pressured, though you do seem a little zealous when it comes to free-market ideology. Not to say there's anything wrong with that! We all have our passions in life.

It's just interesting that you seem zealous about free-market ideology and happen to attend a specific University center program that just happens to be funded by Charles Koch. Also, the author of the report you mentioned (Russell Sobel) just happens to be a Koch-funded academic at WVU. I'm sure he's not influenced at all by the funding either, especially when he blasts all regulations of all types. ;)

Are you aware that the conditions of many of Koch's academic grants are that his operatives in the program get free hand in selecting and approving resulting publications? This is where much (if not most) of the climate change denier research comes from. Does that bother you at all? (not that you were necessarily aware)

If you ever want to learn more about the Kochs and their influence, try to check this out in your spare time. Parts of it go into great detail about their inroads into academia. :)

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/politics


You should check out "What's the Matter with Kansas" - not quite Oklahoma, but outlines incredibly well how Republicans have taken a stranglehold over the great plains despite pushing policies against the populations best interest.

u/Smilin-_-Joe · 1 pointr/politics

Saying there's no hope is just an excuse for apathy imo. It just takes the right creative solution and the public will to support it. I don't know nearly enough to argue Citizen's United, but I have heard some good ideas that don't conflict with the court ruling. If you have the time/inclination I strongly recommend Republic Lost by Lawrence Lessig. He also has some great Youtube videos.

Edited Spelling

u/ScienceBreathingDrgn · 6 pointsr/politics

I'm reading a really interesting book right now that talks about the origins of morality, and how they likely have come about because to flourish we need to be a society, and to be a society, we need to think about the greater good.

I know that probably wouldn't go over well with some religious folks, but I'd take it back WAY past prehistory (which some religious folks might also find objectionable), and talk about early man working in groups.

I really enjoy trying to come up with a reasonable and rational argument that at the same time isn't offensive. It's a unique challenge, but I find the results pretty beneficial for my own thought.

Edit: Dur, the name of the book is The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion

u/IllusiveObserver · 1 pointr/politics

I'm glad you liked it. Here is his Youtube channel. Here is a recent speech given by Wolff about a month ago with a colleague of his.

After a long speech like that, it's nice to see people take action. Here is a nice documentary of workers taking action by occupying factories in Argentina, and taking them over. Subtitles available in the video.

Here is the website for the Rosa-Luxemburg foundation in NYC, the foundation of Die Linke in Germany.

Here is a website with documentaries that cover a variety of political issues.

Here is a book that I strongly recommend you read. You can read it for free here.

If you have any other questions or comments, I'll be happy to respond.

u/N1ck1McSpears · 1 pointr/politics

You have to read (or at least look up) this book If you haven't used the audible free trial I recommend the audio book. It's read by the author

There's also this interview with the author. FANTASTIC

I recommend it all over Reddit every chance I get. It explains everything you're talking about here, but from a scientific standpoint. It's also really extremely enlightening. I just know you'll love it.

u/EvanGRogers · 0 pointsr/politics

LOL - "Food stamp usage is highest in Red States" doesn't mean that "conservatives are using them". And even your "arguments against inevitable arguments" uses insanely broad definitions to obscure the truth.

GJ on the flawed logic. -- Please read "How to Lie with Statistics", it's a great book.

[Here's the stats from Pew Research](
) - a largely non-conservative, non-liberal group. -- They got their info BY ASKING INDIVIDUALS, not by hiding their bias in broad definitions.

I know you're brain can't handle this, but gasp I'M NOT A REPUBLICAN. I'm actually an Anarcho-Capitalist!! WHOOOAAAAA!!

Please! Insult Republicans more! They are largely idiots! But FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, quit acting like Democrats are the saviors of the universe.

u/CareToRemember · 41 pointsr/politics

Amazon's reviews are the best:

my fav:

1.0 out of 5 starsThe Art of the Shakedown by Hill and Tim

ByElaineon September 16, 2016

Format: Kindle Edition

I bought this thinking it would be a how-to book. I wanted "How to set up your own Foundation for fun and profit." Also, would like to have seen a chapter on "Ten easy steps to setting up your own secure server in a bathroom."

I do hear there's going to be a sequel, tentatively called "The Art of the Shakedown." Should be interesting.

u/JAFO_JAFO · 14 pointsr/politics

Definitely a concern. If you haven't read On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century I highly recommend it. Read it in an hour or two.

Much of his references are eastern European states that woke up one year to find they were no longer democracies, but autocracies.

And this is where the real worry is. Putin doesn't want democracy, as evidenced by recent protests: State Media Blackout As Anti-Putin Protests RAGE In Russia and Putin REALLY Doesn't Like Anti-Corruption Protests

So the more western democratic institutions are weakened, the safer his own position is. The stronger our democratic institutions, the weaker and more under threat he is from popular movements.

Also of concern, Trump seems to value democracy and other American values less than past presidents , and this interview/analysis of Trump's G20 meeting is quite accurate and concerning: His scathing critique of President Trump at the G-20 went viral

Further detail of a policy shift is this article: Trump’s Saudi Arabia speech confirms massive shift in US foreign policy

> From these two speeches, it’s clear that our “shared interests and values” do not include things that could be divisive, like respect for human rights and democracy.From these two speeches, it’s clear that our “shared interests and values” do not include things that could be divisive, like respect for human rights and democracy.

edit: second source/link and detail

u/cornell256 · 10 pointsr/politics

They epitomize libertarianism. They're largely (almost solely) responsible for the rise of right wing and libertarian think tanks and ideals in the United states over the last several decades. If you ever want to be disgusted by the efforts and successes of the Koch brothers and their oligarch friends, I suggest this book: It outlines how they've infiltrated the government, academic institutions, and general society with evil intentions and great success.

u/WaterNoGetEnemy · 1 pointr/politics

I think we've reached the point where we've each laid out what we have to say and gotten whatever clarification we can from one another. Thanks for the discussion and maybe we'll talk again.

Probably the one outstanding issue is you asked for a source to explain how the Oil Embargo (that extended to 1974, I just learned) was a major influence on US policy in the Middle East. My belief was formed by two books, Planet of Slums and Confessions of an Economic Hitman.

They're great books, and I totally recommend them, but they don't make for great proof (if that's what you're asking for) in an internet discussion. Let me know if you read either, because I'd really like to hear what you think!

Thanks again.

u/PanickedPoodle · 35 pointsr/politics

This is not about thinking. There have been studies showing that education can make you better at defending incorrect information.

We spread and defend incorrect information because it reinforces a pre-existing bias, often subconscious. Information that is shared virally tends to align with one of humanity's trigger points:

  • Tribalism (racism, they tuk me jobs)
  • Authority (support for police, borders, force)
  • Purity ("dirty" immigrants, "bleeding from her whatever")
  • Sexual dominance ("I just didn't like Hillary", "Pelosi is a bitch")
  • Fairness ("Republicans are hypocrites", welfare queen myths)
  • Loyalty (ok for my guy to break the law)

    When we focus on intelligence, we are demonstrating the Democratic bias toward rules. Education = competence = success. The Republican brain wants to reward personal exceptionalism. "I succeeded, not because of how hard I worked, but because of who I am."

    If we don't understand these triggers, we will continue to be manipulated by them.

    Edit: thanks very much to my anonymous gilder, but the ideas are cribbed from Jonathan Haidt's work. Highly recommend you check out either his book or his TED talk.
u/shard972 · 1 pointr/politics

> Giving things names does not make them true.

In my previous post i did not claim anything to be true, i claimed your assertion that supporters of free-market economics thought it fixes things "somehow". So i gave you one example on how it doesn't just "somehow" fix itself.

I invite you to read Economics in one lesson, its a good read and explains why free markets work.

u/Holmes02 · 1 pointr/politics

Currently reading Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia by Peter Pomerantsev just to learn how Trump's administration will attempt to use propaganda to get away with pretty much everything.

Edit: I'm not the only one. Paperback is sold out on Amazon:

Edit 2: u/Deggit peaked my interest with this book from this comment

u/wagnerdc01 · 1 pointr/politics

If Trump hasn't divested from these businesses every dollar spent at a foreign establishment can be considered a bride. It's a matter for debate but until he proves he's divested it seems like a huge conflict of interest. But when has trump ever used a position of power for his own personal gain.

u/AFuckingCentaur · 8 pointsr/politics

I believe it is called "9-11".

I would also recommend these:

The Responsibility of Intellectuals

Manufacturing Consent (the book)

Manufacturing Consent (the documentary)

He has written like 100 books so there is a lot. Those are probably good starting points. There is an anthology book called "The Essential Chomsky" that is a nice collection too.

u/two_wheeled · 1 pointr/politics

There has been a pretty substantial drop off at least locally for me since the 2018 elections. While it went pretty good nationally, not so much at a local level. We need to find a way to keep people engaged without feeling distraught. A book recommendation: On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century. It is a short read and you could find the twenty lessons summarized if you so choose. The lessons are really about staying involved in the things you can change. Simple things you can do to be a citizen and patriot centered around protecting the institutions that move our Democracy forward.

u/genida · 60 pointsr/politics

This might. Private funding, funneled through philantropic foundations to charitable and social causes. Aimed and organized specifically to swing close elections, influence their idea of a conservative ideology and culture and hand-pick candidates in their service. Billions of dollars from very very rich donors. Candidates either toe their line or find themselves either without funding, or run out of primaries. Paul Ryan and many others are featured.

Lots of names, lots of details. One of the best books I've read on american politics in a long time.

u/francis2559 · 1 pointr/politics

Oh, I agree. Check out The Righteous Mind if you haven't already. Really, really, really good stuff. Helpful, even.

Edit: I should clarify, it changed the way I think so much that I've been slow to put it into practice. Yet every time I walk away from an encounter that didn't go the way I expected, I slap my head when I remember Haidt. The other thing that is helping me is Pope Francis' language of "accompaniment," which he contrasts with "proselytizing." Basically, spend more time listening then talking.

u/ReynardMiri · 1 pointr/politics

There is so much counterfactual information in your post that I don't know where to start. Let's start with her public agenda that she spoke about at length but no one listened to. She even went so far as to write a book on the topic: And to say she has no passion is to ignore her passion for helping women and children.

Then let's go on to Bernie: We have no reason to believe he would have won. Every pre-convention poll of Clinton vs Trump had years of concentrated attacks from across the aisle already baked in, where as the Bernie vs Trump polls did not. And the GOP had plenty of as-yet-unused oppo on Bernie. The kind of stuff that looks a lot worse than it actually is, but requires a more nuanced approach than the electorate apparently has to realize that. Bernie might have won, but that is an unknown.

But the most ridiculous part of your post is the suggestion that Trump is in any way whatsoever straightforward and truthful. I would say that he lies all the time (about everything), but the truth of the matter is that he says things without any regard for whether they are true or not. What hasn't he changed positions on in the last 5 years? Even the last year-and-a-half? His self-aggrandizement is the only thing that comes to mind.

u/Always_Excited · 19 pointsr/politics

Yes. You can find so many writings about how poor are the worst and they deserve every cruelty, and how god meant it to be this way. We romantacized the american revolution a little bit.

It did create a break from monarchy, but it wasn't the kind of inclusive cause that we're thinking today. It still did spark the creation of today, so I'm still glad it happened, but a lot of founding fathers would have a stroke if they saw today's america.

If you want to learn about unromanticized of history; try People's history of the United States by Howard Zinn.

It'll give you a much deeper understanding of world order.

u/ricebake333 · 1 pointr/politics

Help him see the light...

First, our brains are much worse at reality and thinking than thought. AKA we can be manipulated to believe things against our interest. Science on reasoning:

Overthrowing other peoples governments

Protectionism for the rich and big business by state intervention, radical market interference.

Energy subsidies

"Intended as an internal document. Good reading to understand the nature of rich democracies and the fact that the common people are not allowed to play a role."

Crisis of democracy

Democracy Inc.

Testing theories of representative government

Massive state based economy

Manufacturing consent (book)

Manufacturing consent:

u/BloodyMess · 11 pointsr/politics

It gets more than a little liberal echo-chambery after the first half, but before that it is a heartfelt and compelling examination of how moderate, reasonable people became slowly radicalized by right-wing media. Watching it, I felt like the narrator, describing her own personal experience, was talking about my dad.

u/shelly_gordon · 1 pointr/politics

Actually we probably agree on most things (except the rioting, my heroes have always been pacifists Frederick Douglas, Susan Anthony, Thoreau, Gandhi and King). I have ordered the Marjorie Kelly book you recommended. You might be interested in this podcast or this book. I was suggesting we write to our representatives as a small step but most people I know are too lazy or brainwashed to even attempt any action. Good luck with the unionizing - here's some inspiration

u/hypnosquid · 3 pointsr/politics

Yep. Donald Barr hired Jeffrey Epstein to teach 7th graders math. Epstein had no degree, Barr just really liked him. They became close.

Coincidentally, at that time, Donald Barr (again, our current Attorney General's father) also wrote a sci-fi novel about sex slavery in space.


It's possible that your brain will not allow you to accept this as reality. If so, I've got your back

u/mrsgarrison · 8 pointsr/politics

Yeah, this is very true. We've been blackmailing foreign leaders into serving U.S. foreign policy and giving contracts to American business for over a half-century. A really good read on how this topic: Confessions of an Economic Hitman - John Perkins.

u/PM_ME_UR_BLOCKCHAIN · -5 pointsr/politics

>There is literally no evidence that Clinton lacked honesty or integrity to any degree more than any other modern politician.

LOL The point that other politicians are also dishonest doesn't somehow negate the fact that she is devoid of honesty and integrity. Wow. If the best you have is "she's just as bad as everyone else" then you're part of the problem for perpetuating acceptance of lies and corruption. Beyond that, you have to be consciously dismissive of all of the blatant lies that Clinton has told throughout her political career to be able to pretend she isn't just another dishonest worm.

u/ImInterested · 1 pointr/politics

> I'm now convinced I missed it just because there is so much nonsense that came out of that campaign, and now the white house that I can't keep up.

Realize that it is a political strategy, Chaos and Confusion. Putin used it in Russia with great success.

I try to do the following ( Not always successful ) :

  • ignore soap opera Whitehouse stories

  • wheels of justice turn slow let Mueller do his work, especially if you are not a lawyer

  • outrageous statements made by Trump etc, don't waste much time. Ask what else is going on?

  • try to find what Trump and his cabinet are doing

  • blog posts 6 paragraphs / 2 sentences each do not make us informed

  • don't forget you need breaks

    Post I saw the other day, did not confirm.

    During Election the day Trump "grab by pussy" came out the Obama admin said Russia was playing around in the election.

    Chaos and Confusion

    Book : Nothing is true, everything is possible

    RAND Paper
u/SporkOfThor · 6 pointsr/politics

This guy nails it. "A brilliant analysis-and funny to boot-What's the Matter with Kansas? is a vivid portrait of an upside-down world where blue-collar patriots recite the Pledge while they strangle their life chances; where small farmers cast their votes for a Wall Street order that will eventually push them off their land; and where a group of frat boys, lawyers, and CEOs has managed to convince the country that it speaks on behalf of the People."

u/thelazyreader2015 · -1 pointsr/politics

> What part do you not believe?

Your accusation. You have no proof to back it up beyond vague associations.

>No it's not. It's not believing someone on his word, when he spent the last 10 years undermining his own credibility.

Is Hillary supposed to be a saint that going after her for her long career full of controversies makes you lack credibility? I'd like to recommend you a certain book: No One Left to Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton. It was written by the great Christopher Hitchens, who had quite a lot to say about the Clintons over the decades. Did he undermine his own credibility too?

It's weird how Hillary has become even more powerful and influential among Dems now than when she was in office. The way they respond to any uncomfortable facts or questions about her you'd think she was the patron goddess of the DNC.

>Soiomon is vice-Director, he has a lot of influence on what gets published, if the story is so well-sourced and believable, why don't you do us a favor and show us the follow up from other publications with high editorial standard?

The Uranium One bust was carried and analyzed by every major media outlet except maybe the Clinton News Network. Where have you been the last couple of weeks?

u/troglodave · 27 pointsr/politics

You are correct on the title, "What's the Matter With Kansas", but it goes onto much greater depth than the single issue voting. It really delves into and explains why the social conservatives are being played to go against the fiscal conservative values they once held and who is profiting from them.

At the time it was written, 10 years ago, Thomas Frank made the prediction that this was the direction American "Conservatism" would head, and he has been dead on the money! An excellent read for those completely baffled by the ignorance of the average American voter.

u/30plus1 · 4 pointsr/politics

Not All Conservatives.

Just because the right doesn't want grown men in dresses using the restroom with their daughters doesn't mean they want gays thrown from rooftops. They're on the side of traditional family values.

Really good book on the relationship between the right and left here:

Highly recommend it if you get the chance.

u/McCool303 · 14 pointsr/politics

Doesn’t surprise me, his daddy liked to write books about children being sold into intergalactic sex rings. I’m sure none of those fantasies inspired his young employee Epstein.

u/jjepeto · 240 pointsr/politics

You might be interested in the documentary The Brainwashing of My Dad which is free to stream if you have Amazon Prime. I thought it was one of the best documentaries I've seen the past year.

u/Thank_You_JohnMadden · -16 pointsr/politics

A) Addressing one's name and making fun of a physical characteristic are not in the same. Isn't the left supposed to be accepting of everyone and their "body image"?
B) Most people shorten it to DJT and he also embraces his middle initial himself. He even places his middle initial on the books he has authored.

Why? Because it's his name and he's proud of it. Why does Barry feel the need to hide his full name?

u/Tbbhxf · 2 pointsr/politics


Deer Hunting With Jesus and What’s The Matter With Kansas are good reads. They explore the reasons people give for voting against their best interests.

u/TonyBagels · 28 pointsr/politics

"Surprising Op-ed"??

"Singing a new tune"?!?!

Charles and David Koch are the unrivaled kings of gaslighting and manipulation.

They have spent literally hundreds millions of dollars, over decades, on a concentrated effort to influence academia, the media, and public policy towards their pro-corporate (profits) and anti-goverment (public accountability) ends.

"Dark Money" should be required reading for everyone.

Buy it, trust me:

Or listen to the audiobook free here:

Part 1:

Part 2:

u/res0nat0r · 8 pointsr/politics

> What's the Matter with Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America

Replace the title with any GOP controlled state.

u/quietpheasants · 6 pointsr/politics

Yep, it's been going on since the late '70s. The Koch brothers and their billionaire friends (Richard Scaife, Rich DeVos, John M. Olin) have been slowly, systematically filling the government and academics from the bottom up with corporate-friendly lackeys.

Source: Jane Mayer's Dark Money

u/Krase · 2 pointsr/politics

There is a great book a professor of mine asked us to read for a statistics class called "How to lie with statistics". In a nutshell, it shows you how to spin numbers to prove whatever you want.
here it is on amazon

it's a short book, but an amazing read.

u/TotesNottaBot · 3 pointsr/politics

Nothing is True and Everything is Possible which is about Russian society after almost two decades of Putin's rule.

The Warmth of Other Suns and Hillbilly Elegy because, in my opinion, they describe the past in way that informs the present social strife that Trump used to divide and conquer to win the Republican primary and general elections. If the Left is going to have a political answer in 2 and 4yrs for the people who either declined to vote altogether or who voted Trump, we have to understand and have compassion for their plight.

Hell's Angels because of Thompson's pinpointed description of the "politics of revenge". And also his book Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72 has some parallels to the 2016 election.

It Can't Happen Here is in the same realm as 1984.

u/MrXfromPlanetX · 1 pointr/politics

Can we trust Eric Holder? Why did Obama appoint this guy as Attorney General?

“Most notorious was his role defending the food giant Chiquita Brands International, Inc., whose multimillionaire executives were facing potential charges of aiding terrorism because of their financing and arming of right-wing death squads in Colombia. Using his Justice Department connections—and taking advantage of the Bush administration's sympathy for the Colombian fascists

—Holder managed to get Chiquita off the hook with a small fine, despite overwhelming evidence that it had hired gunmen to kidnap, torture and murder Colombian workers, peasants and union officials.”

According to John Perkins “Economic Hit Man” the Bush family owns a stake in Chiquita

This company used to be United Fruit who was responsible for the 1954 coup in Guatemala. The coup over threw Jacobo Arbenz Guzman. Arbenz nationalized the land in the country taking it away from United Fruit to giving it back to the poor. (1987 Bill Moyers PBS Documentary)

Jesse Ventura: “Politics is like pro wrestling.” On the camera they pretend to hate each other, but when they're off the camera they're all best friends and go out to dinner together

u/ImpeachObomber · 1 pointr/politics

Sorry, you don't understand how all those are connected together? Ok, I will be more than glad to inform you.

First, imperialism and its relationship to our recent foreign policy disasters:

Imperialism and its relation to Islamic terrorism:

The economics of imperialism. What drives it, and its relation to neoliberalism:

Please feel free to ask if you have any questions.

And I hope you don't go all like "WAAAaaah! Book learnin'? I don't need no stinkin' book learnin' Rachel MadCow and MSNBC tell me everything I need to know! WaaaaAAAh!" like so many of the BlackBushsheep are wont to do.

u/Fire-Keeper · -1 pointsr/politics

He's for diplomacy with Cuba but we need to make a good deal with them. He said he'll close the embassy in Havana until a good deal can be worked out. The Art of the Deal.

u/danaacc · 1 pointr/politics

Wake up Reddit! Don't let the American Anti-Corruption Act die...

The American Anti-Corruption Act (AACA) was published in Nov 2012. It reached 300,000 citizen co-sponsors by January 2013 but since then has slowed to a crawl. As of writing this there are only about 400,000 signatures. If this sluggish pace continues, support for the AACA will be too weak to pressure congress into making it law.

What's most disappointing is that the internet communities the AACA was most depending on for its success have practically ignored it. There's hardly been any attention generated for the AACA on Reddit over these past 6 months, yet I'm constantly reading comments from Redditors complaining about the excessive influence of money in American democracy and expressing frustration at not knowing how to solve the problem. Meanwhile, well-known activists Lawrence Lessig and Trevor Potter have collaborated to publish a comprehensive solution (the AACA) and a plan for making it law, and Reddit barely notices. I know Reddit can do better because of the strong opposition it showed to SOPA.

So what gives Reddit? Let's wake up already and get the AACA the exposure it needs.

Link to become a citizen co-sponsor of the American Anti-Corruption Act and learn more about it (becoming a citizen co-sponsor just means adding your name to the petition):

Other informative links:

American Anti-Corruption Act: full text and details

American Anti-Corruption Act: analysis of how well individual act provisions will hold up in the Supreme Court (summary: most should be fine)

Lawrence Lessig AMA

Lawrence Lessig TED Talk

Lawrence Lessig Book: Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress--and a Plan to Stop It

Trevor Potter AMA tracks the political money trail tracks the political money trail, the life cycle of congressional bills, and representative's voting records

EDIT: It appears the link to the video might be down right now. It's basically just a clever commercial highlighting how our senators are practically whoring themselves for political money.

u/jotjotzzz · 1 pointr/politics

I agree this is horrendous idea. I would recommend you read through Austrian economics. Here's a good one:

Also, sitting on capital is not a bad thing. It is synonymous with a person sitting on a pile of cash or in a bank. In any sense that is called Savings -- something we need more of nowadays.

u/Dat_Gentleman_ · 1 pointr/politics

Have you read On Tyranny by Timothy Snyder? I bought this book about a decade ago (last year, when it came out). If I remember correctly, he wrote it shortly after Trump was elected as a list of 20 warning signs to look out for to ensure that it doesn't go the fascism route.

Chapter 2 is titled: Defend institutions. The idea of this chapter is that institutions have to be protected or they will fall. My favorite anecdote in the book is in this chapter. He talks about how a german jew newspaper wrote an editorial in 1933 more or less telling it's readers to calm down, there was no way that the Nazis would be able to actually follow through with the horrible things outlined in nazi newspapers. Describing balances of power and such that would keep it from happening. Eerily similar to people today, and this book rings true more and more each day. It is less than 100 pages, everyone should read it.

Timothy Snyder WIKI if you would like to know more about the author

Edit: I made myself want to read it again to see how well it held up over all, a year later. I just wanted to post this from the chapter mentioned above regarding institutions.

“Sometimes institutions are deprived of vitality and function, turned into a simulacrum of what they once were, so that they gird the new order rather than resisting it. This is what the Nazis called Gleichschaltung.”

u/makehertalk · 12 pointsr/politics

A People's History of the United States discusses the subject of manufactured racial strife extensively.
I recommend this book for this, as well as many other highly useful facts that are typically omitted from the normal discussions of US history.

u/BobbieDangerous20 · 12 pointsr/politics

FYI the Mercer Famiky was/is a major player in the Koch network that brought us the radical right and who now own the Republican Party.

Read Dark Money, buy a copy for a friend.

u/HeTalksToComputers · 5 pointsr/politics

You mean like the book that she just put out covering all of her policy proposals? Or the hour long speeches she has been giving in recent weeks on americans with disabilities, or education and economic opportunities for millenials. Or you could go to her website.

If all you have is 30 seconds to devote to your research, maybe you don't have time for policy anyways.

u/nuzmibrett · 1 pointr/politics

This question is incredibly poorly worded, or intentionally written to skew answers in one direction. I am not in favor of "government run health care." I am in favor of a "public option," "government provided health insurance," "health care reform," etc.

An interesting read that is relevant, How to Lie with Statistics:

u/goans314 · 0 pointsr/politics

I'm sorry but that's not correct. The whole growth comes form demand argument is put forward by people that want to use the central banks to print money and rob the middle class.

Think about computers, where was the demand for computers before they were invented? You can't demand something that doesn't exist. With this demand creates growth logic, no new inventions would ever be made.

But if you really believe that growth comes form demand, we may never agree on these points.

Many people recommend this book, which explains it all very easily and clearly:

u/r_shall · 11 pointsr/politics

Upvoted because of my love of Freakonomics. Another interesting book about this topic is The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander.

u/Domhnal · 1 pointr/politics

Kinda funny you mention that. For a overall left leaning place, reddit sure has its share of multiple personalities.

I think we retain our status mostly by this and something along these lines. We really don't seem to be that awesome anymore except maybe to the infantile countries who like grandpa's war stories but aren't old enough to understand that he lives mostly alone because he molested a few children. Or the ones we pay to say we're awesome like Saudi Arabia.

u/aacaman · 1 pointr/politics

The American Anti-Corruption Act (AACA) was published in Nov 2012. It reached 300,000 citizen co-sponsors by January 2013 but since then has slowed to a crawl. As of writing this there are only 365,906 signatures. If this sluggish pace continues, support for the AACA will be too weak to pressure congress into making it law.

What's most disappointing is that the internet communities the AACA was most depending on for its success have practically ignored it. There's hardly been any attention generated for the AACA on Reddit over these past 6 months, yet I'm constantly reading comments from Redditors complaining about the excessive influence of money in American democracy and expressing frustration for not knowing how to solve the problem. Meanwhile, well-known activists Lawrence Lessig and Trevor Potter have collaborated to publish a comprehensive solution (the AACA) and a plan for making it law, and Reddit barely notices. It's this type of apathetic laziness that has been the greatest impediment to fixing politics in America, and I know Reddit can do better because of how active we were in opposing SOPA.

So what gives Reddit? Let's wake up already and get the AACA the exposure it needs.

Link to become a citizen co-sponsor of the American Anti-Corruption Act and learn more about it (becoming a citizen co-sponsor just means adding your name to the petition):

Other informative links:

American Anti-Corruption Act: full text and details

American Anti-Corruption Act: analysis of how well individual act provisions will hold up in the Supreme Court (summary: most should be fine)

Lawrence Lessig AMA

Lawrence Lessig TED Talk

Lawrence Lessig Book: Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress--and a Plan to Stop It

Trevor Potter AMA tracks the political money trail tracks the political money trail, the life cycle of congressional bills, and representative's voting records

u/wuts_interweb · 1 pointr/politics

The Brainwashing of my Dad (trailer)

Rent, buy, watch on Prime, or free (with ads) through Amazon

It's on my own 'to watch' list and I don't want to spoil it but I heard it has a happy ending.

u/metamet · 5 pointsr/politics

To that point, everyone should read Jane Mayer's excellent book, Dark Money, for insight into how the Republican party has arrived to where it is today.

u/MissCalculation · 49 pointsr/politics

because the heads of media feel dependent on the good will of politicians "to ensure access" and other such shit. supposing this was pitched to some news network, they would reject it by saying, "no other politician would ever speak to us again."

journalists - especially the powerful ones - also have a tendency to view politicians as immune from wrongdoing. as just one recent example, joe klein defending the extremely illegal warrantless wiretapping program: . you can also check out the reactions of famous journalists to the pardoning of watergate criminals, the refusal to investigate torture in the bush 2 administration, the politically motivated firing of government attorneys, etc...

for a whole lot more on this, i'd recommend reading the intro of noam chomsky's "manufacturing consent," which is available on the internet and does an incredible job of showing how and why the media has become largely a mouthpiece for the government (at least in america). read it for free here: "with liberty and justice for some" is also a really good book on this topic.

u/maryet26 · 1 pointr/politics

If you like the article, I definitely recommend you read the full essay (where this was excerpted from). It is a quick read (maybe 1.5 hours) and really contextualizes the reasoning behind each point into lessons learned from the 20th century. I cannot recommend it highly enough: On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century

u/VaticanCattleRustler · 4 pointsr/politics

I think the best book was written by someone on the left. Christopher Hitchens was actually a communist in the 60's, but took on a more socialist tint in his later years. Hitchens on Charlie Rose 4/28/99

His book No One Left to Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton is a hair raising book, and I'd highly recommend it.

Edit: Corrected the link to the part with Blumenthal

u/mrhota · 3 pointsr/politics

> there are other people that don't have money because you have so much.

This is a common and unfortunately persistent misunderstanding of economic action, but it's easily remedied! Try Economics in One Lesson, which is also available for free all over the internet.

u/VROF · 9 pointsr/politics

> He tried to make a joke and be cool.

This is the problem. Everyone knows it was a joke. This sad, old man thinks constantly joking about Obama is funny. He lives in a right wing bubble and sounds exactly like every single Republican I know in real life. They cannot let Obama and Clinton go. They literally have nothing else to cling to. It is beneath the office of the President.

u/Stthads · -3 pointsr/politics

Lol. It’s people I’ve known for 20 years. It’s not like they’re evil people.

If you have an opportunity, check out this
documentary >

u/joelangeway · 1 pointr/politics

Your fix could be even swifter. Drop points 1 and 3 until 2 is implemented. Fix the dependence that politicians have on corporate money, and actual democratic reform becomes possible. So long as congressmen have to campaign, and so long as it costs money, and so long as they can get that money from big donors, the big donors will have much more power than little donors or mere voters. The big donors don't like progressive taxes, equal representation, or big government programs that they can't profiteer. They won't allow reform so long as they have the power.

Issues of free speech make it hard to convince everybody we can limit money spent on political speech. The Citizens United decision illustrates this. We can definitely limit politicians' campaigns, contributions thereto, and gifts, but the Koch brothers can make their own ads and Fox can keep a big portion of voters uninformed. We probably have to come up with a plan to fund political campaigns publicly and democratically. I'm a big fan of Lawrence Lessig's work on this.

u/category5 · 3 pointsr/politics

"What's The Matter With Kansas" is actually the title of a pretty interesting book.

u/Jane1994 · 9 pointsr/politics

The reviews on Amazon are hilarious.
Stronger Together: A Blueprint for America's Future

u/TheFoolishWit · 2 pointsr/politics

I think you're thinking of one particular book, which is really good: Nothing is True and Everything is Possible, by Peter Pomerantsev.

u/Nonsanguinity · 2 pointsr/politics


You understand we're talking about Hillary Clinton, right? How does a book by a dead atheist about Bill Clinton, essentially lamenting his triangulation strategy, have anything at all to do with your point?

>LOL The point that other politicians are also dishonest doesn't somehow negate the fact that she is devoid of honesty and integrity.

But that's not my point.

One of two things must be true: either (A) Clinton is especially unqualified as a politician because she is fundamentally dishonest/lacks integrity, or (B) Clinton is as honest as any other politician. If B is true, then either (1) all politicians are unfit for office (i.e., are so dishonest they are unfit), or (2) all politicians have a certain level of dishonesty that society has deemed acceptable.

You are arguing A (or possible B(1), it's unclear since you've provided no real evidence for either claim), and I am arguing that B(2) is true.

Now, you can argue, (and I'd agree) that society as a whole should be reformed such that honesty in rewarded, but your initial assertion that Trump, who has a complete and total disregard for truth at all, is the same as Clinton severely undercuts your claim, as it suggests that any dishonesty is the same as extreme dishonesty, and failing to appreciate large differences is a huge bar to incremental improvement.

u/corey_m_snow · -1 pointsr/politics

There's an interesting book on how we do commit multiple proper crimes every day, and its worth a read.

u/d9_m_5 · 9 pointsr/politics

This is a good point, but we can't just rest on our laurels and assume speech in this country will always be free. I read On Tyranny yesterday, and its second lesson is quite relevant here:

> Defend Institutions

> [...] Institutions do not protect themselves. They fall one after the other unless each is defended from the beginning.

u/vectorjohn · 5 pointsr/politics

This is accurate. People have way too much faith in the "strength of our institutions." They aren't that strong and as we've all learned in the last few months, they depend on the good will of the people in those institutions. It is no laughing matter.

Edit: This podcast episode has an interview with the author of a book which was not written about Trump, but lays out some of the details about what leads a democracy to be overtaken by tyranny. It was interesting and worrying.

u/pablo95 · 8 pointsr/politics

A Peoples History Of the United States is an absolute must-read for anyone interested in politics, history, or sociology.

u/lemon_meringue · 25 pointsr/politics

The book Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia is a really excellent (if terrifying) look at the way that the media operated by Putin's authoritarian state has manipulated and brainwashed entire populations. And it was published a solid year before the 2016 election. It's a rough read but I think it's a book everyone in America should be familiar with.

u/HPVLovecraft · 2 pointsr/politics

If they don't like that one maybe they can read No One Left to Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton by Christopher Hitchens.


I found that one pretty interesting.

u/HistoryWillAbsolveMe · 282 pointsr/politics

Watch The Brainwashing of My Dad to understand how Trump supporters have become the way they are. Its free with ads on Amazon.

u/skeebidybop · 37 pointsr/politics

Speaking of the Koch Brothers, eeryone should read Jane Mayer's Dark Money.

It is absolutely essential reading for understanding what has happened to the Republican party and our greater political zeitgeist.

u/kathleen65 · 2 pointsr/politics

Great book on this is Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. Written by John Perkins an ex-CIA agent who was involved. We have a lot of blood on our hands around the world and it is all for corporations.

u/crunk_zig_ziglar · 7 pointsr/politics

On Tyranny by Timothy Snyder is also amazing because it gives you easy things you can do in your everyday life to fight tyranny.

u/neurosisxeno · 0 pointsr/politics

> and she had all of her policies/plans listed in great detail on her website.

Or you know... this...

u/streetbum · 1 pointr/politics

/u/psychicoctopusSP just told you about a book that is very short, easy to read, and might make you think about this differently.

The system definitely punishes blacks more than whites for the exact same crimes. If we are talking about drugs, assume the exact same situation. Same car, same container for drugs, same type of drugs, same quantity of drugs, same demeanor to the officer and in court, same everything. Different sentences. This is well documented at this point.

u/AlwaysPhillyinSunny · 14 pointsr/politics

I highly recommend the documentary "The Brainwashing of My Dad." It's about how right wing media transformed the filmmaker's elderly father from a caring Democrat into a fearful, angry conservative. It tore the family apart. However, they were able to change his media habits and revert his personality, like he snapped out of a fever dream.

It's on Amazon Instant, and it's a fascinating look at how right wing media operates and how it affects its consumers.

u/Odd_Regret · 11 pointsr/politics

>The best part? Donald Barr wrote a sci-fi book about sex slavery by the rich:

3/5 star rating for only...$184!!!

u/Philipp · 42 pointsr/politics

Thank you. For anyone not convinced, I suggest this video and this book.

If you are already on board and looking for ways to help, here's one:

u/IntellectualWanderer · 2 pointsr/politics

So, while this book is controversial, I think it still worth the read, just with a grain of salt, because even if it's not true, it's still a nice reminder that the "truth" you're told isn't necessarily the real truth.

u/court12b · -4 pointsr/politics

You genuinely trust a man who wrote a bestseller on being deceptive and manipulative?

u/Aedum1 · 89 pointsr/politics

They think like this because it is how they've been programmed over the course of decades to think. I watched that earlier today and it's incredibly informative with regards to what has happened to the Republicans party and their supporters. It's actually really scary.

u/2_Spicy_2_Impeach · 2 pointsr/politics

Looks like they're following this book pretty well so far.

How to Lie with Statistics

u/coldnever · 8 pointsr/politics

Still doesn't mean much since americans are completely uninformed about how politics really works.

Reasoning and the human brain doesn't work the way we thought it did:

Manufacturing consent

Most have no clue what's really going on in the world... the elites are afraid of political awakening.

This (mass surveillance) by the NSA and abuse by law enforcement is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.

Brezinski at a press conference

The real news:

Look at the following graphs:

IMGUR link -

And then...

WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap

Free markets?

Free trade?

"We now live in two Americas. One—now the minority—functions in a print-based, literate world that can cope with complexity and can separate illusion from truth. The other—the majority—is retreating from a reality-based world into one of false certainty and magic. To this majority—which crosses social class lines, though the poor are overwhelmingly affected—presidential debate and political rhetoric is pitched at a sixth-grade reading level. In this “other America,” serious film and theater, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of society.

In the tradition of Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism and Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges navigates this culture—attending WWF contests, the Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas, and Ivy League graduation ceremonies—to expose an age of terrifying decline and heightened self-delusion."

Important history:

u/Go_Todash · 1 pointr/politics

This has essentially been Noam Chomsky's point for decades now. If learning more about this interests you I recommend Media Control , Manufacturing Consent, How the World Works, and most especially Understanding Power. I have read them all and they helped me understand a lot about the world that didn't make sense.

u/tanstaafl90 · 0 pointsr/politics

I question methodology of modern polls. Knowing someone who works for one of the major pollsters, I can quite confidently say that polls, especially political polls, are massaged according to what outcome the client wants. They have long been used as a means to an end, not an accurate description of data. The book I reference explains this quite well and was written in 1954. It's called How to Lie with Statistics.

u/ken579 · 7 pointsr/politics

Can we please also remember that the Controlled Substance Act came about in an attempt to combat civil equality. So groups that benefit from inequality and racism are also at play here, which could very well mean everyone that benefits from the low wages in America.

Relevant read: The New Jim Crow

u/AngryDevilsAdvocate · 1 pointr/politics

Well I did read this

And then this

I'm currently on this

But I will admit, all three have said the same basic thing. Or at least, argued in the same direction. It's the cycle of "artists who sound like", where I only listen to radiohead and then porcupine tree and then bjork and then and then and then and I never hear anything new.

Give me a good contrary economic book, and if I can find it for less than 10 bucks used, I'll read it next month.

u/GammaUt · 1 pointr/politics

I would recommend The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander. A great read on some of the topics surrounding crime statistics and what we should glean from them. Not the main topic of the book of course.

u/innocentbystander · 2 pointsr/politics

There's a book you might want to read, called What's the Matter With Kansas? which is dedicated specifically to that question.

The short answer is republican propaganda A)leads lower-class voters to not realize how far down the totem pole they are, while B)causing them to focus all their energies on external threats to undefinable things like "family values."

Put that together, and you get people who will happily vote for someone who's going to destroy their local economy, just so long as he promises to keep the gays from marrying. Because they've been conditioned to think the latter is the more pressing problem, not the former.

u/RacyOldDottist · 2 pointsr/politics

If you're also interested in more contemporary study of morality, there is "Moral Minds" by Marc Hauser. And I heard a lot about Jonathan Haidt's book "The Righteous Mind" when it came out, though I still haven't read it.

u/NoNonSensePlease · 2 pointsr/politics

It's call indoctrination and unfortunately it can be found everywhere in our current society. "Manufacturing Content" is a great read on this topic.

Google video version or YouTube version (only in US though I think).

u/zyme86 · 1 pointr/politics

One of my mom's favorite books she read as a math major back in the day:

How to Lie With Statistics

u/ElevenAndCounting · 2 pointsr/politics

Very interesting. I'll give this a read later, thank you.

If you haven't already read it, the mini-book "On Tyranny" by Timothy Snyder is eerie.

u/eddieIacy · 1 pointr/politics A good start to actually learning the history of the US Note the word actually in your response. Had you left out that word you wouldnt come across as a condescending, pretentious dickbag.

u/WinoWithAKnife · 7 pointsr/politics

That's not what I said. I didn't say that now is the worst time. I said that we've been collectively pretending there is NO racism, and now more people are realizing just how wrong that is. Just because it's better than it was in the 1890s doesn't mean we've solved the problem.

A lot of white people, especially since the 80s, were raised with the idea that being "colorblind" is the ideal, but are now starting to realize that doing so ignores the fact that black people live a different experience in this country than white people. Part of solving that problem is recognizing that basic fact, which requires "seeing color", and then coming up with solutions that take that into account. "Colorblind" solutions often just give discretion to those in power, which ends up reinforcing the racial disparities that are already written into our society. (Edit: I highly recommend The New Jim Crow, which examines this through the lens of our justice system)

(As a side note, I think there's a decent case that racism in the US reached its lowest point sometime 2-5 years ago, and has increased since then. It's definitely come to the surface more)

u/DoktorSoviet · 5 pointsr/politics

I've heard good things about Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible to detail the cultural mindset of the "New Russia" but to be frank I have yet to read it.

u/Vita4Life · -3 pointsr/politics

Are you kidding me? Tim Kaine is literally giving a Nazi salute on the cover of this book:

u/T1mac · 16 pointsr/politics

I think if Coleman and Krieger ever read "A People's History of the United States: 1492 to Present" by Howard Zinn I think they would have a stroke. Or their heads would explode. One of the two.

u/throwaway5272 · 6 pointsr/politics

Yes, she wrote this entire very boring book full of very boring policies that would realistically help everyone and not put children in cages or make the market look like a turbulent ocean.

u/karai2 · 3 pointsr/politics

You might be interested in this documentary if you haven't already seen it. The right wing brainwashed dad is endearing when he comes out of his spell at the end.

u/sonorangoose · 2 pointsr/politics

Jane Meyer wrote a interesting book about the Kochs and Dark Money

Whatever your persuasion, this should concern you.

u/Hanging_Chads · 2 pointsr/politics

Everyone here who hasn't yet needs to watch The Brainwashing of My Dad. It's free with ads on Amazon.

u/SplodeyDope · 0 pointsr/politics

If you haven't seen it already, check out The Brainwashing of My Dad. Its free on Amazon with ads.

u/-humble-opinion- · 1 pointr/politics

Great book on the matter (focused on Republicans)

It made me appreciate how fucked we are

u/dhpye · 3 pointsr/politics

Confessions of an Economic Hitman is a great read on this topic, detailing how the Washington-based IMF and World Bank would entice countries to bankrupt themselves by pursuing development projects that had no chance of actually accomplishing anything, thereby creating dependent client states that had most of their financial sovereignty gutted.

u/Mikesapien · 2 pointsr/politics

I recommend everyone read No One Left to Lie To by Christopher Hitchens. The Clintons are a real piece of work.

u/artgo · 10 pointsr/politics

> Maybe, but I think Trump just stumbled into the technique through his constant lying and projection.

Uh no. Here you are in total denial of every social media site in the USA constantly being barraged by Russia to amplify Trump.

You are entirely overlooking that 99.9999% of Trump's fanatics have never had a personal conversation with him. And electronic media is their constant interaction. Which Russia, still today, is using Surkov's techniques.

So many redditors have seen personal friends and family fall under the spell of Fox News, yet can't imagine Russia military can advance the techniques of media brainwashing further with the 2012 onward help of Cambridge Analytica.

  • When Alexei Volin, Russia’s deputy minister of communications, was confronted with the fact that the crucifixion story was a fabrication, he showed no embarrassment, instead suggesting that all that mattered were ratings. “The public likes how our main TV channels present material, the tone of our programs,” he said.
  • that defeatist response has become a central part of a new system of political control. And to understand how this is happening, you have to look to Russia, to a man called Vladislav Surkov, who is a hero of our time. Surkov is one of President Putin's advisers, and has helped him maintain his power for 15 years, but he has done it in a very new way. He came originally from the avant-garde art world, and those who have studied his career, say that what Surkov has done, is to import ideas from conceptual art into the very heart of politics.
u/Im_in_timeout · 28 pointsr/politics

I'm sure /u/Dr_Poz was referencing this insightful book from 2005:
What's the Matter with Kansas?

u/iltl32 · 2 pointsr/politics

You've probably committed a felony today. Do you have a complete disregard for humanity?

That's the attitude I'm talking about. "I'm perfect and everybody else is a dirty sinner." Great way to be.

u/ballzwette · 10 pointsr/politics

In addition to ignoring the Labor Movement.

Zinn for the win!

u/NoWarForGod · 1 pointr/politics

You've got the top post on reddit at the moment and you mention Dr. Lessig, give a shout out to his book!

You should all read it!

u/TheLongshanks · 1 pointr/politics

Read “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” and it’ll start to make more sense. Like the imaginary scene the author narrates at one point, they’re an angry mob outside of the rich gated suburb RINOs shouting at them “we’re so furious we’re going to cut your taxes!”

u/stemgang · 8 pointsr/politics

When the Pentagon Papers were released, no one went to jail. Now Assange and Snowden are fugitives, and Manning is a felon.

Reporters go to jail for not revealing sources. This was back before the media was completely controlled. Now they don't even bother resisting.

The law is a tool in the hands of the powerful, and you are committing 3 felonies a day.

Your "freedom of speech" will last exactly until you say something sufficiently offensive to someone with the power to silence you.

But sure, let's quibble about the difference between reporters and whistle-blowers.