807
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
807 points (84.5% liked)
Political Memes
8991 readers
2470 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
About the same level of literacy you displayed when demonstrating an inability to read two (2) words at the end of a sentence.
Soley, not solely. it doesn't matter because the Democrats didn't do anything to really enhance the rights of lgbtq minorities and I'll keep banging that drum.
You haven't provided anything other than oh look they managed to appoint a few Supreme Court Justices. Not a guarantee of anything.
Face it the Democrats only support something once it's popular enough that their power won't be challenged so they never actually put themselves on the line.
It was actual lgbtq minorities that got those rights for themselves and frankly it's incredibly insulting that you give the Democrats so much credit for something they did not do.
For making so much fun of my own comprehension your inability to actually answer anything is astounding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_history_in_the_United_States#21st_century
Feel free to practice your literacy with some extremely basic reading. If you're feeling exceptionally adventurous, you can even check the party affiliation of the politicians and legislatures involved in the passing of the bills and executive orders discussed!
But I understand that might be a bit too taxing.
How the ever-loving fuck does this contradict what I said?
Holy fucking shit.
Do you... do you not understand how a democracy works??
You don't have to answer that, by the way. It's quite apparent.
Every single right listed there was given to the lgbtq community by a court.
Again did you not read the thing you posted? You can't be sitting here making fun of my own comprehension if you didn't read your own article which clearly stays that the rights gained by the lgbtq minorities and the 21st century was driven by activist lawyers and courts. That isn't the Democrats 🤦
Here lets go over the timeline:
I'll get some credit that Gavin Newsome tried to help by forcing California to offer same-sex marriage certificates which their courts been promptly undid. That's one guy who did something tokenery that did not stick and did not put any significant energy after that.
Do you understand that justices aren't Representatives? Like that's not the Democrats getting rights for people, that's people fighting and spending their own money for to fight for their rights.
The reason we have these rights has nothing to do with the Democrats and everything to do with the people on the ground fighting for these rights and it's insulting that you can continue to give Democrats the credit for doing nothing. It took the courts and most likely millions of dollars to give them these rights before the Democrats did anything
This is just the right to same-sex marriage. There are other major problems that lgbtq people face that Democrats are more than happy to get rid of. Did you not read the article I posted above about the Democrats wanting to sacrifice minority lgbtq and trans rights in order to win the next election?
It contradicts what you said because the Democrats didn't fight for those rights and didn't do anything to help enshrine those rights. They just didn't get in the way of people trying to enshrine those rights. I'm sorry but that is not what I want from a party that's supposed to represent the lgbtq minority in the United States.
It almost feels like you're moving the goal post because you just want the Democrats to be partially responsible in any sort of capacity for ensuring the rights of lgbtq minorities when that's just not the case. Would a Kamala Administration be dismantling lgbtq rights the way has Trump Administration is? Probably not. They just be stuck in a dire situation they've been before where the mainstream media continues to use them as a villain and the Republicans continue to use them as a punching bag where the Democrats offer nothing but token support.
So you either didn't or couldn't read the section of the wiki article. Great. We're done here.
Lol I literally wrote out timeline so I could cover key events from the wiki link.
You were making fun of my comprehension but you couldn't even bother to read my comment.
Everyone here can see how you are intellectually dishonest. For me it's actually a great way to end this thread. You've exposed your epistemology wonderfully here.
Wherein you dismiss legislative and executive action, yes, even when the courts work against them.
Like I said. Minimal level of literacy.
Ah so you can't handle any pushback to any of your points. It's no wonder you're famous around here.
You can't make fun of my own comprehensive skill when you are the one that clearly didn't read my last post and made yourself look like a total fool. I admitted I made a mistake but seems to me you're doubling down.
Which one of us is showing minimal level of literacy? Certainly not the person that didn't read their own Wiki post and fail to respond to any counterpoint.
I read the post. I just found it so utterly detached from what was actually written in the wiki article, including some truly bizarre play about how the courts were the ones who TRULY gave LGBT folk rights while also dismissing pro-LGBT executive and legislative action as meaningless, because... it was struck down by the courts.
If that's your peak level of literacy, there's really no reason to play stupid games with you. I have no need of stupid prizes.
Sorry that you really want me to play slop games with your complete inability to process information.
Yeah it's definitely the person that always accuses the other one of the minimal lack of comprehension literacy that's the strongest orator in the thread.
Definitely not the sign of a weak debater with a person that can't support their own points.
Look I get that you don't actually have a response which is why you just keep trying to dismiss my counterpoints of "well when people fight in the courts" it's not the Democrats doing anything. And you still haven't pointed to any legislation or executive actions besides hand waving at a Wikipedia article that didn't support your point.
We all know that you can't support your point it's okay to just stop arguing.
I mean this would work except it's not your house, you offered a public opinion in a community that encourages debate. It's almost like this is an expected reaction to posting something on Lemmy.
But of course I'd expect the person that keeps accusing me of having poor literacy to have that understanding.
And you don't understand what sealioning is. Also unsurprising.
@dastanktal@lemmy.ml also won't propose an alternative course of action like a serious person would.
Bingo.
He's whining and crying without proposing any actually viable solutions. He's simply working in opposition to the best option we have, especially over the next few elections.
I am not even saying that my idea is the end all be all, but I am open to hearing amendments and actionable alternatives.
Do you guys not know what going to like your local volunteer organizations is?
Like do you think volunteering at your local org is just doing nothing?
Bunch of idealistic babies
And its going to be harder if legislation is passed to make that illegal. Hence why we should be showing up to vote to give us as much space as possible to do so and grow our progressive movements. Tankies ignore this because they are not serious about achieving goals.
The tankies would meet up regardless of the law. Because they know how important organizing and assembling is. Liberals would give them to the cops.
You really think Trump is going to pass legislation making all volunteer organizations illegal? Furthermore you really think all volunteer organizations are just going to stop doing their thing because they were found to be illegal?
This is just a stupid Counterpoint because in the United Kingdom where the left lib party is objectively and control they've already restricted the ability to organize.
Do you think Biden was given sunshine and rainbows out when he was involved in helping break up the Palestinian protest on the college campuses?
Don't pretend that the Democrats are your friend. And don't pretend that they won't put up as many roadblocks to prevent us from getting the rights that we want as the Republicans do.
If you want an active example go look at Zohran Mamdani and the type of organization that Democrats do to ensure that these type of progressives cannot survive in the DNC.
Do you think you work would be better done if you didn't have to do it undercover? You could help way more people if you had the room to do so... guess what, that is the elections front of the [class] war. Your neglect of it is harming our movement as a whole. The fact you don't care makes you a bad ally and unserious about achieving goals.
The work has to be done regardless and we don't let silly things such as what's legal and illegal stop us from doing such work.
It would be better not to work undercover but as I said before there's no guarantee under either political Administration about the right for a radical group to assemble wouldn't be restricted so your point is moot.
You're neglect of doing literally any other work other than electoral advocacy it's part of the reason the United States is in this mess and a major reason why the fascists are in the White House.
And the fact you don't care means that you will be limited in what you can do. That makes your movement moot and not serious.
Again. I never said elections are the only think. I am saying that they are important.
Yeah I have a lot of historical Freedom Fighter groups that would disagree with your premise. In particular the ANC would like a word.
As would the Bolsheviks
Well those freedom fighters al had a political party to set terms with their opponents and organize tangible material gains for supporters. Your lack of voting means you don't have that DNC or 3rd party, so yeah you are not a serious freedom fighter, nor are you working to have a true organization.
They made their own political party and did not use the one that pre-existed. Also they weren't solely focused on electoralism as even one of their most important aspects of the fight. They were focused on using electoralism to get their message out. They were focused on using electoralism to show how electoralism couldn't save them from their problems which directly led to the October Revolution.
I've also never said that you shouldn't vote for third party or work with third party only that you shouldn't waste a ton of time with parties focused on electoralism.
It's wonderful to be told what I mean over and over and over again when I've said quite clearly what I meant
100% and because of that they had leadership and structure to start their revolution. A thing you never will because you won't show up to vote and build out the movement. Tankies are not serious about the material conditions and getting results.
Yeah sure if you keep repeating the line about "tankies" not taking things seriously somebody will believe you.
Somebody doesn't understand what local organization is.
Well, when i see tankies being serious about the reality that the most vulnerable is facing then i will see them as a serious group.
Lol I will let my comrades know that locally organizing doesn't count as political action. They will get a good laugh from that
Let them know to vote as well.
I will leave that for them to decide.
Be sure to show them the full thread.
I will they'll be riveted by your epistemology.
I'm sure they'd say something like "Just vote third party!" or "Just overthrow the government!", ignoring that harm reduction assists projects like serious third party attempts (rather than the perennial Hail Mary every four years and no serious work on the local level actually building a fucking party) and organizing the proletariat against oppression (which becomes immensely more difficult under increased pressure from capital or from the inside of a fucking concentration camp)
Asking for you to support your position and if you have a source for it is a fallacy?
Man you must be popular at The Debate Club.
Don't answer any questions and just accuse people of being illiterate and using fallacies when you don't want to answer a question. What a wonderful strategy you have displayed for us