this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
555 points (93.2% liked)

Lefty Memes

4391 readers
590 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!

Rules

Version without spoilers

0. Only post socialist memes


That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)


1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here


Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.


2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such


That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.


3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.


That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).


4. No Bigotry.


The only dangerous minority is the rich.


5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)


6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.



  1. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 50 points 7 months ago (5 children)

Eeeeeh, mixing a lot of apples and oranges on that one. At least in a few of those they have problems way beyond US intervention. Others don't get accused of being wrecked by socialism because that "US backed coup" ended up setting up a fascist government for ages instead, so that kinda muddles the meme as well.

Along with mixing up socialism and socialdemocracy I find sometimes online leftists tend to get overprotective of nominally socialist regimes regardless of what obvious issues they have for unrelated reasons. That seems self-defeating to me, it gives reactionaries fodder to lump all left of centre or progressive governments and only target the worst of them for a cheap rhetorical win.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

Direct US intervention is only part of the puzzle. The constant extraction of resources and funding of the people who keep the populace down through less obvious means is the main thing putting down a lot of the nations who are not US and EU, particularly in the global south.

I don't think it's unrelated at all to point out that it just so happens that (most of) the rich nations have or had a colonial history, and the poor ones were colonized.

Finally, this is a meme, you're looking for too much nuance.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

On that last part we can agree. Although maybe the next good question is whether we should be pushing political ideas via memes.

We're collectively maybe a quarter of a century late to that conversation, though.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Memes can be imperfect but in the current landscape they're still very effective in agitation.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You want agitation... without nuance? What use are you? There's enough shit sticks. Have the backbone to say you didn't think the meme through.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

to grow a tree you must first plant a seed

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

lemmy commenters when a meme post on a meme channel doesn’t have the rhetorical nuance of a three hour video essay: 😡😡😡

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Seems alright to me to discuss the memes in the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Unfortunately for you, we're not here for memes but pointless internet arguments.

PS i am less mad than you

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago

Lololol you use a meme as propaganda and then follow up with it's just a joke bruh.

Trump 101.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Apples are a fruit with thin edible skin and firm white flesh. Oranges are a fruit with a thick inedible skin and soft pulpy flesh.

Apples can be compared to oranges.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (4 children)

What on earth are you talking about? You can totally eat orange peels. They're not great, but become very special if cooked properly.

Given enough processing, apples and oranges are practically the same thing.

Now try bananas and naked mole rats!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

Given enough processing, bananas and naked mole rats can both be turned into mush.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

compared to naked mole rats, i didn’t james bonded a bananana last night

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Now try bananas and naked mole rats!

Never again! Not after what happened at the Brandenburger Tor!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Compared to naked mole rats, bananas are more yellow.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

In Colombia, confundir la mierda con la pomada (to confuse shit with ointment) is used

Colombia wins.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The apples and oranges is more about someone going and eating an orange and then complaining it doesn't taste like an apple.

Like yeah it fucking doesn't it's a completely different thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yeah, but in this case OP's griping that US-baked coups are "different" depending on what breed of socialism it was disrupting.

That's like complaining that braeburn apples and granny smith apples aren't the same while ignoring the locusts eating both.

It's a distraction from the actual point.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

In the modern day, it’s usually not that we’re just mad at them for being socialist; the days of pointless bloodshed like Vietnam and Cuba belong to a time several generations ago. Ever since the 1980s, it’s usually been just that they have something we want, and socialism doesn’t enter into that equation as much. We’re just as comfortable coup-ing Honduras as we are invading Afghanistan, but not for reasons of ideology. We just want their stuff.

Check out “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” for an in depth look at exactly how fucked and criminal the entire system is.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Along with mixing up socialism and socialdemocracy

I think it's you who has things "mixed up"

Social democracy is a political, social, and economic philosophy within socialism

within socialism

#"within socialism"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Criticises observation for being wrong.

Sends example of observation being right.

Interestingly, that Wikipedia edit is NOT in the localized version of that page in languages from countries where people don't make that mistake. The disambiguation segment in that page is also inconsistent with the disambiguation in the democratic socialism page, where it says: "This article is about socialism emphasising democracy. For the form of democracy emphasising socialism, see Socialist democracy. For the ideology focusing on the humanisation of capitalism, see Social democracy."

Gotta love the pros and cons of crowdsourced knowledge.

So anyway, my local socialdemocrat party is very much a liberal center left party. Which you know because they often ally with the socialist and communist left, and things get tense there immediately, given the socialdemocrat party in question rejects Marxism outright since the 70s.

In all seriousness, I'd be willing to accept that in English political traditions they just use the terms differently based on some originalist historical approach as a result of not having an actual major social democrat party to keep up with that sets the commonly understood modern definition. That makes some sense. The problem is that even in English the terms are used inconsistently and mismatched to common understanding of the words worldwide, as helpfully demonstrated by Wikipedia here. As a result, I genuinely don't know what people from anglo territories in general and Americans specifically even mean when they talk about socialism online and I'm increasingly convinced that they don't either.