this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
921 points (98.1% liked)
Flippanarchy
570 readers
796 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 !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Rules
-
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
-
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
-
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
-
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
-
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
-
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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
Literally the outcome of this election was guaranteed back in August. The second the Harris/Walz started polling at 50/50 was when a contested election became the best possible outcome, and a contested election was always going to be awarded to Trump through the captured Supreme Court.
I get that libs are disappointed that the country just gave him the keys without a fight, but Trump was prepared for that fight. It's why they kept shouting that our election was a sham and already decided; they knew they would steal the election if necessary. Dems were never going to do anything to stop it, same as they did nothing for Gore vs Bush.
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?
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.
No what I mean is that everyone who want to stop facism should stop relying on groups and organisations that have a record of being ineffective when it comes to opposing and stopping the fascists.
Check out !inperson@slrpnk.net, !antifa@lemmy.ml and other Lemmy communities to find out about ways to oppose fascism without relying on the DNC.
The US has been pretty good at opposing fascists in the past.
We need the media to stop pussyfooting around and call a spade a spade. They're working so hard to appear impartial that they've decided that reporting objective reality shows a liberal bias.
We were only reluctantly against facism during WW2. That's why we didn't join until halfway through and did business both sides before we were drawn in.
And by "opposing" I assume you mean "installing".
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.
It's very funny to see people claiming to be anarchists ranting about "convicted felons" and "enemy governments".
If thats a rant to you I am not quite sure how to actually answer that. And if using language and arguments that that the user person might actually be able to connect to makes one less anarchist, I wonder what kind anarchists you expect on Lemmy