this post was submitted on 27 May 2026
1357 points (99.3% liked)

Uplifting News

19071 readers
520 users here now

Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews (rules), a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity and rage (e.g. schadenfreude) often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news—in text form or otherwise—that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good, from a quality outlet that does not publish bad copies of copies of copies.

Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 158 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The power to create and limit corporations has been the exclusive power of States for 200 years and upheld multiple times in SCOTUS.

Lets fuckin GO!

[–] GardenGeek@europe.pub 72 points 1 week ago (44 children)

Devils advocate:

You're also sure it will be upheld under this SCOTUS?

[–] LordCrom@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago (2 children)

SCOTUS will not have time for this before the midterms. So still a win for now.

[–] leftascenter@jlai.lu 34 points 1 week ago

Latest last week tonight is An eye opener on what they can really do when pressed by time and don't give a fuck.

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

The "Shadow docket" says hi.

In this instance it isn't law yet so I doubt there will be a rush to get to the SCOTUS yet, but the shadow docket is their favorite go-to with this administration to rush through whatever ruling they deem ~~will help Republicans~~ important.

load more comments (43 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 67 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Love it.

Just kinda sucks that your rights are dependent on your zip code here in the US.

[–] Brokkr@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Minorities have had to deal with this since about the 1500s.

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I don't know, I don't think we had zip codes in the 1500s...?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Always has been 🔫

[–] hzl@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I mean, personally I'm glad I at least have rights in my state rather than being stuck with the lowest common denominator of bigoted shitbag decision making.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 65 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Corporations literally just won the right to straight up vote in elections in Delaware…

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Which bill are you referring to?

[–] TheColonel@reddthat.com 26 points 1 week ago (5 children)
[–] stickly@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Holy shit that is insane

Judge rules Fenwick Island's corporate voting does not dilute human votes

So I can buy a building and sell closet space to other companies (which I also own) for infinite voting power. This is absurd.

[–] TheColonel@reddthat.com 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

What’s preventing a megacorp from buying a bunch of small shell companies and voting in their own best interest?

I am curious how the voting actually works, though.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 10 points 1 week ago

Yeah, it seems like a very simple argument that since every individual owner of a corporation gets a vote, that the owners as a group should not get an additional vote.

I mean, the courts are no longer about what's logical or fair, obviously, but still.

[–] ClownStatue@piefed.social 18 points 1 week ago (5 children)

"However, plaintiff has not demonstrated ⁠that this ​policy violates the principle of one person/entity/one vote."

Never in my life have I ever seen it written this way.

I also like the note about there being “far more corporations” in DE than residents. So I guess this is just a case of it not having been demonstrated yet. I wonder how much it costs to license a company in DE. I wonder how hard it would be for the Internet to absolutely make these morons eat their words. 2 elections? 3?

[–] TwitchingCheese@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

$110 to file an LLC, plus $300/yr fee.

  • Delaware has a turnout around 500k voters.
  • Assume say 25% are absolute morons who will swallow any propaganda you put out.
  • $41 million + recurring $112 million buys you enough corporate votes to win every vote in the state.
  • Welcome to Shadowrun without all the fun parts.
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can we just wipe Delaware off the map and replace it with Puerto Rico?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 56 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Meanwhile, Delaware is making it so corporations can vote there.

[–] Bristlecone@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Jesus, no way? I can't look that one up, my brain can't handle it right now. Logging off the internet for the night...

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml 39 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Absolutely based. Great job Hawaii!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

It is in conference committee now, one step away from Gov. Josh Green’s (D) desk.

Note that the bill is out of conference committee now (with these changes) and was signed on 14 May.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

How very ridiculous, now watch how the feds will bend over backwards to keep Citizens United and corporate cash; it's been a windfall for our poor beleaguered representatives who just need money even though they already make more than the vast majority of their constituents.

Good job, Hawaii, thank you! (will the governor even sign? let's watch)

[–] facelessbs@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Citizens united was one of the worst things to happen to U.S. citizens.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 33 points 1 week ago

Shit's getting wild.

Delaware says corporations can vote.

Hawaii says corporations can go fuck themselves lol

[–] nosuchanon@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It doesn’t take effect until 2027. So they have plenty of time to overturn it and keep cheating for the midterm elections.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Ulvain@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hold for the supreme court overturning it in 4... 3...

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 24 points 1 week ago

I'm sure Clarence Thomas has a gift about it. Wait, did I say "gift?" What a silly thing to say. I meant "opinion."

[–] YeahIgotskills2@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Genuinely wild that democracy is propped up by private industry to ensure their own interests. Its farcical.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (8 children)

It's almost like capitalism is inherently incompatible with democracy.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

This is a terrific model for the other states.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org 18 points 1 week ago (4 children)

wait for the supreme court to overturn it because it "violates the free speech of companies" or sth

that's why we need states' rights, sothat we're resilient against the bullshit of the fed.gov. because let's face it, 90% of the fuck-ups happen at the fed.gov level. the municipality can do a lot of good. the city builds schools, the fed.gov goes to war with iraq.

mamdani paves the way. that's what we need in every city. taxes should be paid to the city, not to the fed.gov. that's what brings political power down to the lower level, closer to the people, holds politicians more directly accountable since they now live within walking distance of the population and every vote matters more on the smaller level.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] SeeSmudges@quokk.au 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

not sure it will have any effect in federal politics but love it at the state level

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

A state can do that? That's AMAZING!

If this passes the courts, then this is a massive game changer. Blue states can do it, and once they start getting better, the Red states will want to it, and they can have the battle with the wealthy to remain corrupt. That will be fun to watch.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] atro_city@fedia.io 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

As a non-USAian and not a lawyer, what is the difference between power and speech? Isn't removing the power to "speak" (donating money) not an infringement on "free speech"?

Edit: The article OP shared helped

  1. Doesn’t this violate Citizens United?

No. As Dean Soifer put it: Citizens United “struck down a federal regulation that prohibited an already-empowered corporation from spending its resources in elections. Neither that case nor any other has addressed whether a state must grant political spending power in the first place.”

It's like bring born without a mouth: you can't speak so there's nothing to prevent --> no infringement on "free speech".

[–] Canconda@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Good question. TLDR speech is expression not capability

Corporations are legal entities created by the government whose jurisdiction they operate. As such everything they are allowed to do is fundamentally authorized by the state that creates them.

The video in the main link actually does a fantastic job of explaining this if you watch it through. Here is the relevant part to your question.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 11 points 1 week ago (10 children)

All the way up until the US Supreme shuts that down

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] lechekaflan@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is a state which was once a kingdom, but private corporations slowly encroached on it in the guise of improving its standing in the world, until the oligarchy launched a takeover which deposed the kingdom completely then systematically handed rule over to the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

They really should do this with a lot more activities, make gambling legal but illegal for any corporation to be involved in. That way a couple friends can make friendly wagers but huge corporations aren't ruining millions of lives through gambling addiction.

Instead we have it completely backwards, legal for corporations to take bets with a house advantage doesn't matter how many people gamble their rent money away, but then if joe schmoe has poker night at his house with a few friends, he's got to worry about the cops raiding his home.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We'll see how it goes. Politics in Hawaii are very.. different that the continent. There are very entrenched power structures still in place from the kidnapping of Queen Liluokalani. Effectively the same sugar planter families responsible for the coup still largely control business and politics on the islands. And they were eugenics practicing but jobs looking to maintain a plantation system modeled after slave systems in the American South and the Caribbean, complete with racial heirarchies and the Master and Servants act. The impacts of that history get largely glazed over with lei stands and Aloha.

Most people outside of the islands probably don't know terms like "Asian settler colonialism" or recognize that in large part, the modern Hawaiian sovereignty movement is as rightwing and reactionary as the boogalou boys, and as kookie as the sovcits movement. Hawaii might be a blue state but it's hardly a monolith.

Also, Green, Schatz and Case all suck massively. I can't find any one to run to replace Case.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›