this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
580 points (93.4% liked)
Political Memes
8001 readers
2911 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Jesus fucking Christ.
I'm not kidding. I don't think you could explain the thing you're taking issue with without projecting your ethical framework onto it.
We can have a conversation about effective/acceptable methods of activism without all this bullshit posturing. Just say the thing you mean and leave the agitprop to the activists.
"I take issue with the presentation of all major sides of an issue to be indistinguishable because they are both flawed, with the implicit or explicit exhortation to support neither, when there are obvious and important differences between the two with one being unambiguously preferable, and choosing neutrality is siding with the oppressor"?
What the ever-loving fuck would be describing a political issue without projecting an ethical framework onto it?
"'Bothsides' attitude is bullshit and, ultimately, right-wing bullshit"?
Criticism of your party doesn't 'implicitly exhort' support for neither, dipshit. It's exactly this inference that's the problem with your categorization scheme. Democracy can't work when any and all dissent is filed under the same category as 'openly fascist'.
Both parties sharing a huge, glaring problem is a pretty valid reason to engage in dissenting speech.
That's the fucking point. Having the disagreement is politics, but framing that disagreement as 'opposition' is willfully malicious and you know it.
Nah, man. I know full well you've read MLK, don't be the patronizing white-moderate. Both sides are shit, we should be arguing for changing that not just signing blank checks for the less objectionable one.
I never said it did?
... okay?
Man, I'm not fucking talking about "Anyone who disagrees with the Dems".
I don't disagree? At the same time, when it comes down to the metal, if those are your only two choices, you have to be prepared to bite the bullet and take a side, not say "Both sides are the same!", which is what is being criticized here (in the meme, of self-proclaimed centrists, though, given Lemmy's makeup, the comments have predictably veered towards self-proclaimed leftists doing the same). When Nazi Germany comes a-knockin', you side with the US, or the UK, or the USSR, regardless of what valid criticisms you have for each. Because there is a bigger enemy afoot, and there's not an alternative option that doesn't result in vast amounts of people living under fascism.
I've told people since the end of the election, if you want to start a third-party movement, now is exactly the time. Or if you want to do a revolution, now is the time to lay groundwork. Now is the time to decouple from the Dems, if you're going to do it.
I'm not exactly a Dem partisan. I just recognized that in 2024, our realistic options were fascism or the Dems, shitty as they were, and of the two, there's no real contest in which should have been preferable. I'm still pissed that my life is on the fucking line, not to mention the lives of millions of others, because a third of the country decided fascism was an okay alternative, since 'both sides' were the same. And I'm pissed that I saw that sentiment here regularly, on Lemmy, from the mouths of supposed leftists.
I'm used to hearing it from "centrists", like in the meme. But if there's one thing that Lemmy has taught me, it's that while leftists might be less repugnant than the general population, we're not actually any smarter. Just as gullible, just as senseless, just as willing to engage in feel-good politics over reality.
Guess I knew that on an intellectual level, but hadn't accepted it emotionally before I moved here.
Just stop.
Right, so why are we playing semantic games with categorizations when now is the time to be pointing out why the democrats are unelectable (while on the topic, that is why they lost to trump). The body politic moved out from underneath them and they didn't react. It isn't because some stubborn group of progressives were making a fuss about a pet issue. I don't care if you wanna wring your hands that the republicans are a greater evil than the dems, i care that centrists (like, actual moderates who run cover for democrats by claiming their the only "realistic" option, coughcough) keep turning their anger at the people pushing for the things they claim to support but never 'when it comes down to the metal'.
Is leftist some fun outfit you put on sometimes when the weather suits you? You've been using this account for long enough I think most of us have you pegged as a warhawk liberal, not any kind of 'leftist' - none I would ever care to work with, at least.
That's funny, because I've had numerous 'leftist' posters tell me that the Dems lost because of progressives abstaining due to one pet issue or another. And what's worse, they've backed their stance with data.
The only war that I've been in support of since I've been on Lemmy has been the war in Ukraine against Russian imperialism and genocide.
I'm extremely anti-tankie, and don't regard harm reduction as optional, unlike some purity-obsessed posters, but if that's what makes me a warhawk liberal in your eyes, go off, I guess.
Maybe they lost because they actively avoided addressing any issues.
The only war you've concerned yourself with is a war that has the biggest geopolitical implications. In a certain light, this looks a little like you're only really concerned with wars that have the biggest implications for western geopolitical soft power (which is absolutely true about Ukraine). If it were on the merits of 'opposing imperialist ambitions and genocide' as the anti-tankie label suggests, I would think the genocide in gaza would at least rank, since Isreal's imperial ambitions and actions in Gaza and the middle east are far more recent, bloody, and asymmetrical than the war in Ukraine.
As an anarchist living in America, I have a whole lot of questions for anyone who strongly cares about the Russian invasion of Ukraine but doesn't seem to give two shits about the imperial ambitions of a western ally in the ME. Maybe 'warhawk' isn't quite the right term, but 'leftist' is for sure not the right one.
You present far more like a career security advisor working out of the pentagon, but I'm not conspiratorial enough to seriously think that - tho it is interesting to think about.
There are many reasons why the Dems lost. Every one of them bears some blame, and most - though not all - of them are on the party leadership.
Unfortunately, the data provided by leftists on Lemmy has been very convincing in putting forward that even a single one - namely, leftists abstaining from voting Dem over their personal issue of choice - could have saved us from fascism. Instead, those selfsame leftists chose to embrace as much genocide as possible, killing literal millions, even just at current projections.
The only war I've supported, not the only one I've concerned myself with.
I've expressed deep opposition to Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza, as well as their invasions of neighboring states.
I've openly stated opposition to all Israeli aid. I've denounced the idea that we should be allies at all with Israel, due to their horrific conduct.
And you would be right to. Unfortunately for your argument here, that has nothing to do with me.
Lord.
I would much rather have this conversation, because I find it endlessly interesting. The one thing i'm sure about is it doesn't help in the slightest to focus blame on voters or casting aspersions at people criticizing democrats. Especially when those people aren't creating the tension - it's present regardless if democrats suppress discussing it.
No matter how you slice it, though - the sentiment that's consistent across the board is that democrats/democracy are incapable/uninterested of fixing the problems we're feeling, regardless of what we think they are. Class conciousness/material analysis is so piss-poor here that almost everyone has their own idea of the most important issue, but every one of them results in the same populism we're seeing on left and right of center. People just don't believe our problems can be fixed through democratic means, and on the left it manifests as apathy/despair, and on the right it manifests as fascism.
I personally think oligarchy is a fantastic massaging vehicle, not only because it's correctly identifying the issue of capital (this is the defining feature of leftism, btw), it's actually addressing the visceral reaction to the many different failures everyone can actually feel. Even the war in Gaza and Ukraine can be tied back to oligarchy and capital. But for sure what doesn't work is 'alpha energy', 'losing our woke reputation', and 'slow, responsible progress' narratives from people like Slotkin and Jefferies. "Everyone is too radical" and "don't rock the fucking boat" messaging will do fuck-all, too.
'Concern' was my attribution to you, I know you don't personally consider yourself unconcerned with the other conflicts. Maybe it's because you spent the first half of 2024 leveling these 'bothsides' accusations against anyone bringing up Gaza but were unbothered by people drumming up energy around the war in Ukraine. I'm also pretty sure i've seen you in the comments complaining about Houthi rebels and Hamas liberation groups resisting against western imperialism, which to me is a red flag for someone claiming to be anti-imperialism and anti-tankie. If you say the other conflicts concern you I guess I just don't buy it, based on what you spend your time talking about. It might just be that I'm reading the democratic priority messaging through your activity and it has nothing to do with your personal tastes for armed conflict. Who knows, but as someone who thinks the US is particularly guilty for war and famine across the globe, even simply 'supporting' the war in Ukraine is gross to me.
Yea, that's my sentiment too.
Of fucking course. Infinite tolerance for 'flawed' allies until that 'flawed' ally is in any way linked to the dreaded shitlibs. At that point, genocide and imperialism become a matter of 'bothsides'.
Love that you've spent the past half-dozen comments talking about how criticism must be allowed for, even when criticizing groups in the midst of fighting fascism, and now you're saying being critical of Islamists is a 'red flag' for being "anti-imperialism and anti-tankie"
This is what no-theory does to a motherfucker. There are no 'good guys' in the Ukrainian war except the people of Ukraine themselves, only giant and bloated imperial states fighting over imaginary territorial lines with the unwilling sacrifice of working class blood. Tankies might object to that war because they prefer Russia to the west, but I oppose that war because the working class is forced to battle over geopolitical supremacy, and in the end will live as indentured servants to the west. The working class have everything to lose and the least to gain from that war. I have zero problem condemning that whole conflict.
No war but class war, bootlicker.
If i could give out three nobel peace prizes, the first would be to the south african delegation, the second to the doctors in gaza, and the third to the houthis. We might disagree on a lot, but i'll join hands with anyone to fight for the right to self-determination of any people against any genocide.
I don't cherry pick which fascist states get to conduct imperialist genocides and which don't - if the democrats think themselves above criticism for contributing to genocide abroad then they are my enemy, too.
Love that you're pro-genocide for Ukraine, but anti-genocide in Palestine. I guess Hamas is just more well-read on theory and more deserving of your support.
Except Ukraine, it would seem.
I wish this was at all surprising, but you're the perfect caricature of the kind of 'leftist' I was talking about. You just needed a little time to drop the mask, it would seem.
Russia can get fucked, but they aren't a ethno-nationalist settler-colonial project predicated on anti-arab racism dead-set on purging Palestine completely. Only a coward would hide behind Russia in order to avoid condemning the utter depravity of the US and Israel.
FUCK Russia, but FUCK the west too. No states, no masters.
At least you're not larping as a leftist anymore.
Literally did condemn Israel's genocide and the US for supporting it, but I guess that's not important when you have Ukrainian genocide to ignore.
"Opposing genocide in Ukraine means you aren't a leftist"
Yikes.
Lmao, you can oppose a genocide without advocating for US involvement, genius
Ya know, the thing I'm taking away from this entire disagreement is that the one common party in both conflicts is the US.
This is a huge leap of logic, but maybe WE are the problem.
Ah, the "Might makes right" interpretation of world politics, "If they can't survive without outside help against a much larger enemy, let them die; anything is better than the dreaded Shitlibs(tm) doing something terrible like offering aid"
I'm sure you would've been an opponent of lend-lease in WW2 as well.