this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
397 points (99.3% liked)
Flippanarchy
1183 readers
63 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.
-
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I took a speech class in college and was assigned pro-gun and pro-hunting as my platform for the persuasive speech, something which I am not, actually, in favor of for the most part. I took it seriously, and did a good enough job to get an A. I still don’t support those positions but that’s not the point.
It’s actually really good to get students to research and write things they disagree with to some extent because it opens them up to new alternatives and information, and forces them to really think about good ways to counter-argue their own beliefs. Which imho is super useful long term because it makes people very aware of the… I guess non-absurdity? of their opposition. Like those people often came to their beliefs for similarly logical (or illogical) reasons you arrived at your own.
So maybe them not wanting to argue for the company doesn’t really matter, if you assign randomly and tell them they don’t have to agree with the position, but they do have to make a solid effort to support it. Even better if you give each of them an opportunity to swap sides for another, maybe similar, thing later.