this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
863 points (98.0% liked)

Flippanarchy

529 readers
1042 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to [email protected]

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 115 points 1 day ago (3 children)

congress has been abnormally silent. just a fucking ghost town.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 day ago (38 children)

Democrats have announced that they're going to make a statement at 3:45pm EST today or something. Our government is actively in the middle of a coup, and they're "going to make a statement."

I'm sure it'll be some finger wagging, and that's about it.

[–] Jumpingspiderman 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh, that's not all they'll do. There will also be some strongly worded letters.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (22 children)

Liberals are sort of, fundamentally incapable of understanding that the republican voter is more than just like, some stereotypical idiot white southerner, or self-interested multi-millionaire, I think. They're incapable of understanding that republican voters can often be some of the more marginalized in society. The disabled, and migrants, as we've seen. Dumb people, even, right, people with less education. Explicitly, explicitly this is the case, they bring it up all the time! As though that lack of education is some sort of moral failing, or thing to poke fun at. They don't understand that conservatives will rightly point out that sort of mockery and call them cruel elitists. It takes this cruel and apathetic stance towards those groups, this unempathetic stance that has no interest in understanding how we got there, this incurious stance. It's so overly moralized, to the point of incoherence. Well, that disabled person or migrant voted for trump, so, FAFO, they deserve to die, I guess. What am I to do? Well, looks like the palestinian voter in michigan decided not to vote, so, FAFO, guess their family is reserved to being buried under beachfront property. What am I to do?

It's callous, it's a self-callousing kind of reaction. It makes you number, and it makes you dumber. It's cope, basically, I guess is what I'm saying. It's a way to contend with a cruel reality by becoming crueler yourself.

It also has some intersection with two things. This assumption of free will, and thus a kind of innate moral character and disposition, a constant internal moral agency for all your actions, and so there's obviously something it inherently shares there with liberalism philosophically, right.

It also, in the positive rhetoric, has an intersection with this sort of, political armchair jockeying, where everyone theorizes that rhetorical moves are being made by politicians for some theoretical person out there that isn't them, but the fundamental character of the party is still agreeable, and okay. You can't question the party's positioning on Gaza. Even if you can cede that it's immoral, explicitly, then it has to be done because it's electorally advantageous. I don't understand how they can't see how this alienates a ton of people right off the bat, because it shows that you're willing to do things which are actively morally detestable and still not win. It's never the case for policy which itself is a positive end, like healthcare, that they are willing to violate legal and political norms in order to take action on that. Or even, say, violating political norms in order to stop a genocide. It's only that they're willing to keep up a genocide in order to win electorally, and then whatever follows is sort of what you're just supposed to get as a reward for sitting through 200,000+ people dying.

So I dunno, that all just pisses me off. I wish people could argue about actual tangible policy, and then pursue that unabashed as an unqualified good, rather than being tricked into believing that their own sense of good, their own goals, are naive, and they need to settle for more exploitation as the cost of doing business. It's both a cope that makes you callous and it's a nihilism that grinds you down. An apathy, in the face of politics.

I also don't understand why in the political realm we have all been so reduced to viewing things purely in terms of like, whatever is within our black and white moral compass. So team-based. No attempt at nuance, understanding, or empathy. It's insane, I think social media has truly kind of rotted people's brains, in that respect, by shaping the contexts in which these kinds of interactions happen, reducing the means of people's expression into pre-approved categories, into little sequestered realities. We're maybe cooked cause of that, I don't know.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago (2 children)

If more people voted, this would not happen right now :) but both sides the same and voting doesnt matter.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Acting as if fascists did not nearly successfully couped the last time they lost the election is so much denial.

The people that voted last time got a goverment that could not stop a convicted felon, certified rapist, enemy goverment asset and obvious fascist from running again. They would not have been able to stop a fast nor a slow coup.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 17 hours ago

Their loss wasn't nearly so catastrophic as to make it clear they're in the minority. The issue with democratic legitimacy is that it's mostly about impression of consensus rather than pure numbers because humans suck at processing numbers. Sure, neither government might have the actual endorsement of the constituency, but it doesn't matter if the voting portion of it is split closely enough that it seems like they do.

If, say, the Reps hat lost 30:70, they possibly wouldn't have been quite so bold, and on the other hand, the Dem leadership might have felt more confident in opposing them. Moreover, reducing Rep significance to a footnote could create space for progressive movements to be more than a spoiler, which could give them more weight in the internal party politics.

Note, however, the abundance of "could" and "possibly" and "might". The difficulty with counter-factuals is that you can't really compare them to facts. It's just as possible that nothing would have been different at all. Much of predicting politics and public opinion is guesswork based on incomplete information, and putting it to a representative test would probably be impossible and possibly dangerous.

As it stands, you're unfortunately right.

[–] chiliedogg 12 points 1 day ago (5 children)

You're right.

Why slow down the coup when you can just give up and let them announce a concentration camp for undesirable immigrants without any pushback?

[–] untorquer 12 points 1 day ago

Step 1: should have voted to stop the coup Step 2: should have voted for a slow coup Step 3: should have voted for a less fascist coup

We recreate the structures we seek to dismantle...

Don't @ me I voted but the Democratic playbook has been to cede ground and take only clout back my whole life.

Like corporations and consumers the fault isn't with the voter when the system is stacked against them and the options are two evils with one the lesser.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago (48 children)

But the people who stayed home because the democrats didn't offer them a pony are noble and should be regarded with the utmost respect!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago (7 children)

Oh, the extreme submissiveness of those who chose to blame for an electoral loss the millions who did not vote for the Leaders who refused to move an inch towards the interests of those voters rather than blaming the handful of Leaders for not moving an inch towards the interests of millions of otherwise natural voters (in fact, they even moved away).

It takes quite a "the boss is always right" butt-kissing boot-liking mindset to blame millions for not following an asshole rather than blaming "the boss" for being an asshole.

One of the most eye-openning discoveries here on Lemmy during this whole Electoral Process in the US is just how many of the "centrists" in America have interiorized a quite extreme level of unchallenging subservience to those they believe are their leaders.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (47 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 day ago (2 children)

"John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it"

-An Actual US President said this

(Andrew Jackson, btw)

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›