this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
490 points (92.8% liked)

Memes

46041 readers
2419 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Default_Defect@midwest.social 1 points 8 hours ago (10 children)

Near as I can tell, a leftist would do anything to keep a liberal out of power over believing only 75% of the same things as them, and allow the right to take control, but at least they get to keep the moral high ground of not allowing a liberal to do that 25%. Never mind that the right actively opposed everything to leftist wants completely.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 8 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

We're the People's Front of Judea, not the FUCKING Judean People's Front!

[–] melisdrawing@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago
[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 52 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (7 children)

Unpopular opinion:

Alienating liberals doesn't create more leftists, it only causes people to be dismissive of the term and dig in their heels.
Insulting them rather than educating them does nothing but divide anyone left of center and after the last election I think it's abundantly clear that we need to be unified rather than divided.
No one is going to argue that left leaning candidates aren't far from perfect, but they're a hell of a lot better than the far-right fascists were about to have in power in less than 2 weeks.
Yes, I agree modern liberals are too centrist and ineffective but at the end of the day they're light-years ahead of the far right, and I'd rather be agitated about having another centrist administration than alarmed and outraged at the onset of fascism.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 8 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

last election I think it’s abundantly clear that we need to be unified rather than divided.

Who's "we"? Liberals are not on the left and are ideological enemies of the left: you can't be unified with people who fundamentally oppose you.

Also, which election? Oh right, you're one of the those American liberals who think foreigners are fictional characters. That explains why you think leftists would want to ally with the people committing genocide against these "fictional characters"

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

what is the benefit of writing a response with such a hostile tone?

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 4 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (4 children)

What's the benefit of mollycoddleing genocide apologists like Chainweasel?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 9 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

thats not an unpopular opinion though? maybe on the west? revolutions happen by convincing your fellow brothers, not by force or manipulation.

this is the hard part imo, we all have to go against the media machine.

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Liberals facilitate fascism

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 19 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

That's why it's important to communicate with them rather than alienating them.

[–] gravityowl@lemm.ee 6 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

You're talking as if for over a year (cough decades cough) Palestinian activists hadn't tried talking to the liberals about their party's unshakable support for the ongoing genocide.

What's left to say to people who are "going to pick the lesser of 2 evils" even when you showed them that their pick is still funding the ethnic cleansing of all Palestinian people?

We should talk to general leftist people. Not the liberals. They still value money and profit over people

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 5 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

i probably would have taken that liberal stance long ago, but i had people explain their views to me in a good way that eventually made me rethink some of the things i held as truth. its just that it doesnt happen overnight. im not saying anyone will be convinced but the socialist strategy of getting people talking about political topics in a consistent organized way actually helps a lot here.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

There aren't enough leftists to win with violence, so our only hope is to win with dialogue. What's your plan?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Dialogue can't change the mode of production, so we must create more leftists so revolution becomes feasible.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

agreed -- how do we make more leftists though?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 15 hours ago (1 children)
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Exactly. Talking. Violence isn't going to make more leftists.

That said, call me paranoid but I think three-letter organizations are the main obstacle to organizing. I don't know what to do about that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

By telling potential allies they're as bad as the enemy of course! It'll start working any day now.

The leftists have their own magical thinking and it's seems be to inherient to the movement. But unlike rightist magcial thinking, one cannot bully their way to a leftist paradise so right wins and will always win until the leftists compromise. No sign of that happening in my life time.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 hours ago

Liberals are the enemy though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 17 hours ago

I disagree, so my plan is just violence

[–] CatLikeLemming@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

Apparently to some that's the goal. I had a chat with a leftist a while back while the US election was in full swing and she was absolutely against the concept of voting for a lesser evil, since the worse things get, the more people will turn to leftist extremism, which is a win in her book. Suffice it to say, that talk made me anything but sympathetic of her view...

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 9 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (7 children)

And that is an accelerationist. Anyone champing at the bit for a violent revolution is deeply naive or deranged. We need to put the brakes on at all levels and speeding up extremism will only get innocents killed. The status quo sucks but anyone who has lived in a war torn nation can tell you a chained rabid dog is better than a loose one.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 53 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

Gestures at the current state of affairs

I don't think patience is working guys.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 10 points 22 hours ago (11 children)

But stabbing your neighbor isn't exactly something most people are willing to do.

And any sort of attempt at organization leads to Alphabet Squad raids and whatever bullshit charges they feel like throwing at you after deciding you're guilty of being a dirty commie/socialist/librul/not them.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 9 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

We really need to not stab our neighbors, anyway. CEOs, however.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 5 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (8 children)

Whacking a CEO doesn’t do shit. They just install a new one and divert more funding to the police state.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago

I gave up on this conversation years ago.

Fine, for the sake of argument, I’m a liberal, because I don’t want to give you 45 extra minutes of my time in this comment section to try and explain the difference when I know you’ll ignore most of what I say anyhow, and derail us from the point I was actually trying to make. If I’m a liberal in your mind, so be it. My point stands.

[–] peteypete420@sh.itjust.works 5 points 21 hours ago (4 children)

What is the difference? I'm not sure what I am any more.

[–] comfy@lemmy.ml 8 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I’m not sure what I am any more.

Political labels are pretty junk, especially after centuries of mass media and propaganda in the mix. I find it helps to learn to convey your values specifically if you want to avoid that whole mess.

  • The 'left-right spectrum' is subjective and relative which makes it pretty useless without having a ton of context. "Leftist", by itself, is mostly a meaningless term. To socialists, a progressive liberal is usually considered center or even right wing. Some socialists even call other socialists right-wing. It's just pointless.
  • What the US mass media calls 'liberals' is a progressive liberal in political science. What the US mass media calls a conservative is usually a conservative liberal aka right-liberal, that's why they constantly prize liberty and freedom. The US libertarian is simply a classical liberal. They're all liberals!

Useful video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nPVkpWMH9k - "Why the political compass is wrong", explaining how vague and ultimately ineffective the left-right auth-lib models of politics are.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 16 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Liberalism is the ideological aspect of Capitalism, Leftists support some form of Socialism.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

If you're looking for a label, I recommend not. Soon after you pick one, the definition for that label will change and no longer fit your ideology. This change might be due to your own understanding improving, or due to societal shifts, or both.

Write out your ideology in long form. People tend to support good ideas when not attached to politically charged labels.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›