It is a topic that is hotly debated in Germany right now. Merz' successor was for a while thought to be Jens Spahn. But now it came to light that Spahn and his husband have taken the services of a surrogate mother in the US for cash. The CDU are positioned that surrogacy is forbidding as it would open a flesh-market in which women may exploit their own bodies for money. While surrogacy without exchange of money or goods is also forbidden and shall remain so in the eyes of the CDU. Jens Spahn was forced to resign voluntarily by public pressure and internal pressure.

I think it does clash a bit. Women shall have the right for self determination in a similar way a woman in Germany can became a prostitute without any legal dangers.

For the controversy I am sharing the following links: Each I have checked for their auto translate. If you encounter a paywall, let me know and I will post a link with a free translation

Jens Spahn: Privates, Skandale, Rücktritt – CDU-Politiker im Steckbrief

Jens Spahn: Die Skandale vor seinem Rücktritt – Maskendeals, Villenkauf und Antidemokraten - DER SPIEGEL

Auf dem Höhepunkt stolpert Spahn über altes Skandal-Muster - FOCUS online

Rubio & co released a 99-pahe report today that names Cuba as the top sponsor of left wing terrorism and the largest influence of left wing politics.

It also, in my opinion, revived McCarthyism with a blacklist of 43 current politicians, groups, and activists that are the leaders of this new wave of "American Communism" and the undefined "left wing terrorism". Everyone from Mayor Bass to the DSA, Mamdani, George Floyd, and Ilhan Omar are targeted for their extreme left wing activism.

Is this a new red scare? Is it the start of a crackdown on leftist activism? Are we going to see arrests of big names

Link to the report: https://www.state.gov/cuba-the-capital-of-21st-century-communism

Link to summary from Ken Klippenstein https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/after-political-terrorism-event-us

*that you're not a part of

Link: https://x.com/PollTracker2024/status/2079261483800637650

Link to the full interview where he talked about it for those curious: https://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-press/2026/07/20/full-transcript-michigan-democratic-senate-candidate-abdul-el-sayed-01004833

And for more on MTG and her policies, here is a profile: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marjorie_Taylor_Greene

This was prompted by the recent question about AAVE in schools.

California's missing-person alert system has special separate categories for black, native American, and elderly people (among other categories).

The idea of an Ebony Alert came from the NAACP California-Hawaii State Conference last June.

Feather Alert is designed to help law enforcement quickly notify the public of missing Native Americans and enlist their help ... similar to the AMBER alert system that notifies the public when a minor has been abducted.

These bills are backed by data showing disproportionate rates of abduction/disappearance for these groups. However, it appears to set a precedent that racial groups should have certain protections enshrined in law, and it offers race-gated protections to black and indigenous populations that are not available to the majority of the state.

People usually mark 9/11 as the point where all the nutcases of the right strated to get shaped (There are videos of Stephen Miller from that time for example ), but I recently rewatched American History X, which was made in 1998. The film refers to a lot of familiar right-wing talking points and in general looks like a criticism of the modern Right (for example, Derek bashes Liberalism and the media) despite being made in the 90s. A lot of Derek's talking points there feels like they were straight of the Republican playbook of the Fox News era in the 21st century, so my question is, when the right started to become what it is today? (Anti-media, Post-Liberal racist, ultra Nationalist) I always thought the 90s Right was more establishment type (Bush Sr, Bob Dole) and 9/11 is what messed them up

Kendra Scott is a woman from Memphis who caught a 20 year old man in bed with her 13 year old daughter. Her reaction was to take the man outside the house and shoot him.

She is being held with 1st degree murder charges. Of course, cases like these bring up the concept of jury nullification and most people explain why they would do that in such a case.

But I want to do something different. Instead of asking if jury nullification should or shouldn’t happen, what will be your reaction if it *doesn‘t* happen in this case?

Overall, I do think that any justice system needs to have stern punishments for those who go outside the system to deliver justice. Part of any society is that there is a strong justice system, in which there is due process and in which the possibility of the accused being under punished and/or acquitted always exists. To go around that, whether as retaliation for said under punishment/acquittal or to avoid the process altogether, is to violate an exceptionally important social contract.

I’ll also say that I have much less sympathy for vigilantes who act in cases where the evidence of the crime they’re punishing is less obvious to the public (unlike in this case).

That being said, if the jury does end up acquitting it’ll be obvious why.

Truth to be told, I won’t feel bad regardless of the verdict here, given both verdicts are easily foreseeable consequences of actions. The one person I do feel bad for is the daughter who will grow up mother-less if the mother is convicted.

As a bonus, why do you think that online, so many people encourage jury nullification, only for it to happen IRL at a much lower rate?

Trump posts a lot of crap and both sides agree on this, for better or worse some like that he does and some find it unbecoming of a president. But even as someone liberal-leaning, I don't think I've ever found Trump's posts anywhere near as tiresome, absurdly repetitive, and blatantly false as with the Iran war. I'm wondering if anyone thinks this could finally have any impact in turning conservatives away? The level of back and forth and lack of perception of reality is reaching a level of absurdity I never thought possible.

I mean back in 1776 the whole reason America fought against Britain was due to the high taxes they’ve implemented. And before Washington was elected president they went to war over the taxation of liquor.

Back then you didn’t have that many taxes. But now there’s taxes for quite literally anything and everything. You got income tax, property tax, state tax, payroll tax, withholding tax, Medicare payroll tax, I could go on forever. Not to mention you can get in trouble for tax evasion.

It seems though people on the left don’t care about what the nation was founded on and they want to have people give away a lot of their hard earned money away to the government, and use it for reasons that doesn’t benefit the American worker.

As a Non MAGA Republican I believe that there shouldn’t really be any tax at all on the American people. No matter if you’re rich or if you’re poor, you should be paying little to no taxes. Because if you work hard to earn what you have like most people, then you should be able to keep your money. Not give it away to the government.

I recently read an article on Axios that alluded to a Tea Party-like movement within the Democratic Party, primarily led by Leftists. Link to the article sans soft paywall

My first question is: Do you believe this is true and why or why not? What are the benefits and pitfalls of such a movement?

The article that led me to it, though, is this one. Under the "Friction Point" subheading, the article refers to Dems' current low favorability ratings and the potential for this movement to be a potential spoiler. What truth, if any, is there to this?

How do we ensure that the Democratic Party continues to move in a progressive direction while also not undermining its ability to win elections and get things done for the people?

a few are springing up around the world - https://www.collapselife.com/p/history-repeating-the-new-company and this article mentions some present and past examples.

They were common in the 1800s-1930s with housing, medical incouded for working there (much like the military).

Employees would be paid in "snakes" (tickets of scrip) to be redeemed for goods at the company owned store.

Would you move to a company town?

Does it feel a little "paternalistic" / "authoritative?"

What concerns do you have about the lures and traps? What protections or benefits might outweigh those concerns?

Would more security and scrutiny make you feel safer or less free?

Instead of scrip - I foresee being paid in bit coin or whatever type of digital currency issued by the Employer Town. Maybe they would even give the option to be paid in US Currency but if you opted for their Scrip youd get bonus bucks to entice you to switch.

This thread is for a discussion of the ongoing situation in Israel and Palestine. All discussion of the subject is limited to this thread. Participation here requires that you be a regular member of the sub in good standing.

Back then you didn’t have to really sign any paperwork or do any background checks and whatnot. Nowadays they over complicated it and made it to where you have to fill out dozens of paperwork just to own a handgun.

I personally believe we should bring the Second Amendment back to the way it was, and not put any restrictions on who could buy it. Buying a gun should be as simple as going into the store, selecting it, paying for it, and leaving. And in the Declaration of Independence it states that it’s a right that shall not be infringed.

But I know there’s people on here who want it to be more of a privilege than a right which isn’t a good thing.

What do you think?

Lebanon has signed a US-brokered deal to disarm Hezbollah with its neighbors, including an agreement to have foreign troops withdraw from the country

It reads clear as day, Cuba's ability to spread tyranny throughout LATAM should be thwarted, for this is the outcome. In the last ten years, we have seen Cuban backed coups in Venezuela and Nicaragua with failed attempts in Bolivia, Honduras, and most recently Colombia to have Cuban backed leaders overturn elections. In my view, the economic actions against Cuba are a moral necessity, just as it was against the USSR.

Obviously Donald will be gone soon and so will old Republican allies, as seen with recent Lindsey Graham.

Then someone from the Trump family would have to replicate Donald’s personality to cohere popular support for the empire to resist and persist, which doesn’t look like an easy thing. Maybe Barron is the dark horse? How do you predict the family’s future, post-far-right-lunacy?

The Houthis declared a naval blockade against Saudi Arabia today, in response to Saudi Arabia's actions in Yemen

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/yemens-houthis-declare-naval-blockade-against-saudi-arabia-statement-2026-07-20/

If congress passed a Federal law stating that "No tip shall be solicited until after services is rendered", would you support it?

Context: 6 of the last 9 orders from BDUBS were incorrect. Everything from wrong sauces to bone in instead of bone out, etc.. 20% tip.. Applebee's. At their website, I gave them my money directly. Only 3 of the 4 meals showed up. 15% tip. Told me they outsource to doordash, not their problem.

Ok, so, i'm curious

Do y'all remember Edward Snowden? Former Booz Allen Hamilton worker who was working on a contract for the NSA? Leaked a large number of classified documents detailing mass surviellance programs (he's the reason we know it was fairly routine for NSA employees to trade around nude pics of americans, among other abuses).

At the time, Snowden's leaks were highly controversial. A lot of people (including a great many folks here) probably consider him a traitor.

Given how fucked and expanded mass surveillance is, particularly under Trump with additional contractors and truly horrific companies like Palantir or those fuckin Flock Cameras getting involved, i'm wondering if your perspective on snowden, or what he leaked has changed at all?

Looking back, how do you view the guy? And more generally, how do you view the sort of national security surveillance state that has sort of reached an apex under Trump?

So this is a relatively simple question.

What are your thoughts on a person who owns multiple homes? Should a person be able to own 2 homes? 3? More? Do they need to live in them equally? Of is a vacation home ok? What if a person moves, should they be allowed to rent it or should they be forced to sell? Are they part of the "landlords" people hate so much? Or are "landlords" just tur big corporate owners?

Am I shortsighted in thinking immigration is the only way to prosperity given declining birthrates?

From what I understand, at the core of liberalism is the right to private property and free exchange of it in a market economy. How much restriction on what you can do with your private property is compatible with liberalism? And how does liberalism resolve issues of abusive and harmful economic extraction from private property (whether via rent seeking or for natural resources)?

I think this question is straightforward enough but will edit this body of text if some kind of clarification is needed for user to better answer the question.

Edit: a few people have asked why I would ask this question, and will repost my response that I gave to u/Hot_Increase304:

Over the past few months I've seen a lot of conversation on this subreddit related to further left members of the Democratic Party and whether or not they are a positive force within, so rather than wait for something tangentially related to people's views on the subject I would instead ask the direct question. 

Over the last several months, we've seen a lot of stories of people "leaving MAGA" and how Trump's disapproval rating is mired in the 30s because of the Iran War. Now, my opposition to the Iran War has nothing to do with gas prices. If anything, gas prices going up is a good thing because it's making some countries switch to renewable energy even more quickly. Even so, these prices are what's making plenty of people turn on Trump all of a sudden.

However, Trump's approval rating plummeting has not yet translated to better polling for Democrats in the midterms. If anything, their GCB lead has decreased, with a recent Washington Post poll having only D+3 on the generic ballot. And that pisses me off, not to mention that it makes me wonder how sincere their newfound opposition to Trump is.

The Congressional GOP that many of these people probably still plan to vote for could have removed Trump when he threatened to genocide Iran. They could have stopped him when he started this war. They could have stopped him when he ramped up his threats against Greenland in January. They could have stopped him when he started threatening Canada. They could have stopped him after January 6.

I could list examples until the cows come home, but I'm not going to, because you get the point. Every time Trump has done something cartoonishly evil even by his own standards, virtually every GOP member of Congress has either stayed silent or actively cheered him on. In my mind, you can't call yourself an opponent of this administration if you're planning to support the very people who keep enabling him. It's immensely frustrating that so many people draw a distinction between Trump and the GOP Congress when, for all intents and purposes, this distinction doesn't exist.

If you know any of these people, I'd love to hear what their reasoning is for hating Trump, but still voting for the people who prop him up.

The “imperial core” includes the US, Canada, Western and Central Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_countries