77 points

Inb4 centrists “that’s unfairly reductive! That’s not what we’re saying!”

permalink
report
reply
37 points

I think I hate centrists the most.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

While I find centrists to be the most frustrating, I hate the bigots the most.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Nah, hate the right the most, but don’t let people try to invalidate your right to feel frustrated with status quo sluggishness

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

I hate the fascists the most followed closely by their enablers. It’s nitpicking, but the centrists can be easily manipulated into choosing the middle ground between Democrats and Progressives, so it makes them somewhat useful if you can swing things a bit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*

“I’m a centrist, all my beliefs just so happen to coincide with one side and it ain’t yours”

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yeah, I don’t often see the centrists chiming to hear from the liberal side.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Normally I’m super liberal! Go ahead and check my comment history, that way you can waste your time and argue semantics with me. I vote Democrat consistently and strongly support my senator, Nancy Pelosi. But on this one specific issue that we’re coincidentally talking about right now, you have to admit the far right at least have a point - anyone who passed a college economics class should know that. So anyhow, that’s why children should be allowed to work in coal mines again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You leftists are just too far left. But Hitler was a bit too far right, so i guess I’m in the middle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

What makes a man turn neutral?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Lust for gold? Power? Or where you just born with a heart full of neutrality?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Its sad that you conaider such an oppinion centrist. It shouldn’t be.

permalink
report
parent
reply

There’s just no logic to “seeing both sides” in a world where one side is trying to provide for the most vulnerable in our society with healthcare, food, housing, or safety, and the other side is worshipping a “billionaire” playboy wannabe who is promising to destroy any hope for those very same people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
62 points

People can disagree on policy - on values, though? On values, someone who disagrees with me can fuck right off. Human rights and democracy, please.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

I’m done with democracy and propose a new form of government:

Once a month, there’s a giant parade and everyone who has an idea gets to put together their own float/performance; best entries get governmental positions based on ranking. Anytime there’s a disagreement, each team will debate by presenting their argument while completing challenges from '90s-'00s Nickelodeon game show challenges; chatGPT will rate which argument is the most cohesive and assign percentages and then the time differences will be added to each team to determine final scores.

Finally, if anyone is caught cheating or trying to create fascism, their entire parade team gets eaten alive by all of the other parade teams. Only people willing to eat others alive or get eaten alive are allowed to be politicians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

It used to be that every group in New New York wanted their own parade. Why, when I was a boy, we had a parade every day. Those were dark times.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Only people willing to eat others alive or get eaten alive are allowed to be politicians.

Wait, is that ‘or’ or ‘and’ get eaten alive? Like, what if I’m willing to be eaten alive, but I want my other teammates to do all the people-eating for me?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

How dare you correct my wrong words! I’ll see you on the Steps of Knowledge, punk!

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Would I be allowed in the parade if I wasn’t a politician?

If so, then I agree with your idea.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Every third Friday is the citizens’ parade followed by naked mole rat races Sunday

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

Homophobes at Pride events wave a sign that says GAY= Got AIDS yet?

All conservatives are trash.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Using an acronym to make another acronym is totally cheating, too! “GAIDSY?”

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’m so meta even this acronym.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Took me a minute.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points
*

Can’t violate human rights if they are sub-human

permalink
report
reply
14 points

And this is why speciesism is a root cause of so much human-on-human oppression. People unquestionably accept the premise that it’s ok to exploit/murder/etc non-human sentient beings, so dehumanizing certain groups is incredibly effective at getting people to be ok with abusing them. If we rejected non-human abuse as well, there would be no incentive to dehumanize each other

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I mean, you sort of have an argument there. But that’s also a really huge leap: “If we can’t stop people from refusing to value other people, let’s just get them to value every living thing.”

If you’re at point A on the line, you’re going to have to get to point B before you get to points C, D, or E.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

it depends how and why they’re devaluing the other human. If they’re basing it on dehumanization in order to exploit/abuse them, then that is in fact built on the underlying assumption that nonhumans are fair game to exploit/abuse, although they are also factually incorrect about the other humans humanity.

Strategically, it might be easier to get them to recognize that fact, or it might be easier to get them to accept compassion for all sentient beings and then point out the logical conclusions of that, it really depends on the person and situation, but I’m not talking strategy I’m just pointing out an often-unspoken root problem

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

there would be no incentive to dehumanize each other

Profit, religion, or just plain malice are all incentives

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Malice and disrespect would still be incentives, but how would it be profitable to dehumanize other humans if it didn’t grant you any ability to exploit them more than you could exploit a “humanized human”? What reason would religion have (not that they’d need one to just make it up 🙄) to dehumanize other humans if it didn’t imply your religious group is more valuable than the dehumanized humans (besides malice and disrespect)?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Nah, I only eat grazers, and actually don’t devalue them for it. Vegans technically qualify but it’s too much of a bother to make sure they’re kosher.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

And then conservatives parrot “wow I can’t believe you say mean words to me just because we have a tiny difference of opinion on whether or not you should be allowed to exist.”

permalink
report
reply

Political Memes

!politicalmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

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.

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.6K

    Posts

  • 79K

    Comments