this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2023
325 points (80.0% liked)

Lefty Memes

4409 readers
61 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] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

I'm liberal and support trans/gay rights, woman's body autonomy, social umbrellas for the poor and unhoused, legalization of recreational drugs, but I also like guns and desire all minorities who have no agency to own them, as well as support all wars against bullies because pacifism does nothing to stop them otherwise. Where do I stand? I guess I'll go fuck myself then.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

That's the fun thing; go far enough left and find that guns become an important tool for the proletariat to protect itself from the ruling class.

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

I agree with all of those except I don't like guns. Don't want nothing to do with them, and those that do should be required to take mental and physical competency tests as well as mandatory registration. I wouid also impose a minimum 5 year prison sentence for letting one of your guns fall into somone else's hands owning a gun should come with massive responsibility to keep the gun secure.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Similar to nuclear proliferation, it doesn't matter if you don't like nukes because if your neighbor simply has only one of them, then they can leverage it to force you to do things against your own interests with the threat of your complete destruction.

Your recourse is to bend over and let them fuck you, or build/buy your own nukes to deter them bullies. Pandora's box is open; guns are necessary and are never going away. Either you arm up the helpless to allow them to speak at equal footing using them as deterrence or let them slowly and eventually be destroyed by the growing intolerant majority.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

So everyone just gets guns? I should carry a gun with me at all times and live in fear of my neighbor? This is an absurd viewpoint, guns don't deter shit, if someone wants to shoot me, owning a gun won't stop them. Nuclear deterrence doesn't work with gun ownership because if I own a gun, and you shoot me, I'm not shooting back because I'm dead.

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

If all your neighbors have guns, you might want to get one too, or you're at a disadvantage when they gang up to kill you.

That's why it's like nuclear proliferation.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why would they need to gang up to kill me? They have guns, they can kill me damn near instantly even if I have a gun myself

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

This.

Gun fetishists live in this wild west fantasy where someone planning on shooting is going to slowly and deliberately approach while announcing their intentions so you can respond and have a showdown ensuring only the gunliest gunner wins. If somebody's going to shoot you, you're just going to get shot - probably before you're even aware, or at least without sufficient preparation time to grab your gun or pull your gun and aim.

These people just tell themselves fairy tales to justify their hoarding.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Pretty much yes. Literally the only reason you live in a peaceful society is because you have delegated all violence to a specific group of people and armed them to ensure everyone follows the rules: it's fucking called law enforcement.

The cops are allowed the monopoly of all violence; if you need help, you call them because they have guns and can compel people (i.e. criminals) to do things by leveraging this fact, otherwise no one will listen to them.

Do you seriously trust ALL cops to all maintain the idea that all gays and trans people deserve life? Most of them would not mind if society leaned extreme right and imprisoned all the "undesirables". You are fucking delusional to put all your trust into them.

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

I don't trust a single cop, but I also don't trust many people to be allowed to have guns either. If you look at countries where guns are not readily available there is much less gun crime, and any guns that people get are coming from the US because we hand them out basically for free. If the US has stricter gun control it would most likely lower gun crime around the world even.

Edit: another thing I want to mention, I don't call cops if it can be at all avoided precisely because they do carry guns. Once you I produce a gun into a situation, it becomes instantly more dangerous and unless it is something like a mass shooting or a violent robbery I'm not gonna call the cops for shit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Basically this, people should consider disarming when the police and military do as well

Until then, nobody should have a pure monopoly on violence

[–] bdonvr 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

social umbrellas

Treat the symptoms not the cause

support all wars against bullies because pacifism does nothing to stop them otherwise.

Simplify geopolitics into "bullies", support the actions of NATO/US as though they're not "bullies"

Pretty much liberal yeah

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Treat the symptoms not the cause

Treat both. They usually give you a painkiller while setting your bones.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Wait until they find out that there's a ton of "we don't know what the underlying cause is" and "we don't have a cure for that yet" in medicine. In which case you have to do your best treating the symptoms -- which is also true outside of the world of medicine.

Sometimes a temporary fix buys you time to do it right. Sometimes a perfect or even "really good" solution isn't feasible for myriad reasons: so you do the best with what you have.

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

It's just such a stupid false dichotomy. Give the man the fish and teach him to fish. It's a lot easier to learn on a full stomach.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

You expect leftists to do anything but idly daydream about the day that a socialist revolution finally and magically falls into their laps?

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

Treat the symptoms not the cause

I definitely prefer my symptoms being treated while waiting to get the cure

[–] bdonvr 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Liberals don't want the cure though. They want "ethical capitalism" or whatever. (A contradiction in terms)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I didn't say they were the one with the cure

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

Treat the symptoms not the cause.

You'll find that almost all liberals also want to treat the cause, but they are blocked at every step by conservatives and centrists.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

But why do they defend the core underlying cancer - capitalism?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Those are all very liberal-minded interests and there's nothing really wrong with them. The left largely agrees as well but would go further to the structural causes for why these issues are important, questioning the very economic and material arrangements for which these issues are contingent on. IE why does our economic system require people to be poor? What are the class dynamics behind these issues etc.

Liberalism is the ideology of free markets and individual freedom, but those mechanisms are contingent on exploitation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

why does our economic system require people to be poor

Let me guess, you’re from US. Or from Canada, and are stuck in US narrative.

Your economic system (or rather society) has never ditched slavery, which is nowadays masquerading as a penal system. Poor people are easy to enslave.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I think you're missing how I'm rhetorically posing that question to the preceding comment and not sincerely wondering myself...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I think that makes you a leftist who hasn’t yet realized that liberalism doesn’t want many of those things.

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

Most Americans still don't realize there's a difference. I've been hoping the recent conflict in the Middle East would wake some people up to the major differences between libs and leftists - it sure did for me.

Leftists are literally losing their job for not supporting Israel and yet liberals are still out here confused about what's even going on.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Liberals prefer negative peace - the absence of conflict - over positive justice.

If you prefer positive justice, you aren't a liberal.

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

Sounds like liberalism can go fuck itself too if they don't care about trans/gay rights, etc.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They care about them in a performative way. The minute it stands in their way or they can’t use it as a tool to get your support to gain or maintain power they will immediately drop the act. Before Oberfell even Obama wouldn’t give a clear statement of support for gay marriage because it was seen as political poison.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

They care about them in a performative way. The minute it stands in their way or they can’t use it as a tool to get your support to gain or maintain power they will immediately drop the act.

Standing up for trans acceptance and rights is the right thing to do but it is by no means a winner of a political platform:

The public is divided over the extent to which our society has accepted people who are transgender: 38% say society has gone too far in accepting them, while a roughly equal share (36%) say society hasn’t gone far enough. About one-in-four say things have been about right. Underscoring the public’s ambivalence around these issues, even among those who see at least some discrimination against trans people, a majority (54%) say society has either gone too far or been about right in terms of acceptance.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/

Democrats haven't dropped it yet, despite anti-trans sentiment being one of the Right's favorite things to rally around.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Need to know his stsnce on capitalism first.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Sounds liberal af to me; definitely not a leftist.

Long live the American arms trade and long live the empire!