this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2026
460 points (80.6% liked)

Political Memes

11571 readers
3161 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes 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.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) 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
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

i really want to understand what they thought they would accomplish

I’ve been asking for almost two years and no one will say. I get a lot of “screw you, fascist!” And “Oh, so everyone has to have a plan now?!?” amongst other head-scratching non-answers.

The most important thing appears to be to not be involved in any decisions, movements, or other political realities that might conceivably ever have a chance at existing in our lifetimes. I guess.

Honestly at this point most are indistinguishable from straight up FSB bots. Divide the left, no other goals.

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

you get to choose one and only one:

either the group that would not vote for harris is small enough that they don’t deserve representation, in which case the democrat establishment is to blame.

or the group that would not vote for harris is large enough to have impacted the election and deserved representation, in which case the democrat establishment is to blame.

you can’t have both

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think these are the people who choose "Do nothing" on the 5-v-1 trolley problem. i.e.: they would rather let 5 people die than take an active role in killing one. I can understand the moral argument, but it really does make for objectively poor outcomes.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

The Trolley Problem isn't a correct Games Theory representation of this situation, not even close:

  • For starters, those doing the chosing don't know for sure what's down each track (we do know now, with hindsight and only for the chosen branch, but that's long after making the choice and you still don't know what would be down the other track)
  • Second, it's not an individual choice, it's a mathematical calculation (not even an average) of multiple choices which were not coordinated (i.e. each individual does not know enough at the time of their own choice to predict the final result), so unlike in the Trolley Problem, there is no individual responsibility.
  • Last but not least, this is a cyclical choice were how many victims are on the tracks for the next choice is influenced by what was chosrn in an earlier cycel and even how many people made that choice - sending the tram down a line with more victims now might actually mean fewer victims on the line of one or even both branches for the next choice, or the opposite (clearly past choices created this situation were both candidates were Genocide supporters hence there we're far more victims on both tracks)

You have either been deceived by this propagandistic misuse of Games Theory and are now parroting it without fully understanding it or you are knowingly being deceitful for the purpose of supporting the leaders of your party.

[–] Triumph@fedia.io 11 points 2 days ago

Apathy is also participation.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They will tell you that AOC, Omar, and Mamdani aren't really 'Left' because they sided with the Dems.

Purity first last and always!

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I've seen people say that Mamdani is a traitor because he didn't denounce the NYPD after that snowball incident.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ex-New York Mayor Ed Koch put it so simply.

"If you agree with me 51% of the time, vote for me. If you agree with me 100% of the time, see a psychiatrist."

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 14 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Meanwhile, American leftists: "if I don't agree with them 100% of the time they're not a real leftist"

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

actually it would be fucking nice if we could reach 50% agreement of the issues. too bad the establishment dems have more in common with republicans then their own base

Someone think of the consultants!

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago (16 children)

I had a long chat with you about this recently. And I don't think I said "screw you fascist" or "who needs a plan?" And I think I stated it pretty clearly. If the democrats want our votes, they have to not arm genocide. Not voting for them until they stop arming a genocide is a perfectly clear way of staking that position. If literally no votes are held back for that modicum of decency then they have absolutely no reason to change. There's absolutely nothing confusing or illogical about it, and I don't know why y'all pretend you're so bamboozled by it. I mean...you can disagree, go for it. Vote blue no matter who if that suits you. That's what I think.

But you want to know what I feel? All of you are in here with a photo of two characters whose lives have been destroyed, imagining "this could be me thanks to those assholes who wouldn't vote for this to happen to other people." It's so unbelievably selfish. We all gotta just accept that Palestinians will suffer like this...that's the price we pay for it not to be us.

[–] U7826391786239@piefed.zip 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

so now we have a fascist rapist pedophile con man in office, the genocide is worse than ever, and now we have a new genocide in the making, not to mention in the states, and i'm skeptical that "votes" will even be a thing ever again.

congrats on your moral superiority

[–] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (9 children)

And all the democrats had to do to avoid it was not arm a genocide? Which they shouldn't have done anyway? Failing to see how this is my fault.

Sorry if we got in the way of your plan to throw palestinians in the woodchipper and go back to brunch. Congrats on your moral inferiority?

[–] U7826391786239@piefed.zip 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

plan to throw palestinians in the woodchipper

because they would have been better off under trump? how's that going btw?
how about the iranians? how about immigrants? how about education? healthcare? environment? economy?

dude, the "i won't vote for genocide" thing is noble, but you're ignoring the real world in favor of your idealistic delusion of a country where we can just throw our vote away and think that will change something.

can i tell you a secret: the united states of america will NEVER stop fellating israel. no matter who is president. did you think jill stein (or who the fuck ever) would snap their fingers and all of a sudden put a leash on israel? honest question

[–] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (10 children)

I mean...i'm sure you agree with this: if the democrats want to win, they should not be making choices that cost them votes. Their post-mortem on 2024 tells them that continuing their pro-genocide position cost them votes (according to axios anyway, who I guess got a peek at it somehow. the democrats have decided they are not going to publish it.).

That's real pressure for them to change. Not voting for the democrats created that pressure. They now know that abandoning israel will lead to a net-increase in their votes.

And yeah, I would hope that when looking down the barrel of more domestic fascism, knowing that it will matter from a purely Machiavellian perspective, the democrats will stop arming a genocide.

Like...I get how scared everyone is. I have family members who are undocumented immigrants in the US. It is terrifying. My neice might get shipped off to some el-salvadorian torture prison. Life would have been better for them if Harris had won. But I don't regret refusing to vote for Harris because (a) I reject the claim that I have some ethical culpability for what the the fascists do (that's just some ontological fuckery that I can't straighten out in my mind, even with the benefit of a philosophy undergrad and years more of school and work figuring out all kinds of tax-law fuckery), and (b) people taking this position has created measurable pressure on the democrats to change. I guess there's also the sneaky (c) my vote would not have counted anyway because I'm not from a swing state.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] chortle_tortle@mander.xyz 6 points 1 day ago

Yeah the better version of this meme has the text, "Well at least she didn't say anything antisemitic."

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

All the democrats had to do was blah blah

Wow you really showed them.

[–] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean…actually though; their postmortem says they lost net votes due to arming the genocide.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

But I've been told that it wasn't enough to change the outcome? Which is it?

[–] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

Hamid Bendaas, a spokesperson for the IMEU Policy Project, said that during the meeting "the DNC shared with us that their own data also found that policy was, in their words, a 'net-negative' in the 2024 election." Two other senior aides at the pro-Palestinian organization also said the DNC had drawn that conclusion.

https://www.axios.com/2026/02/22/dnc-2024-autopsy-harris-gaza

I don't know whether it was enough to change the outcome or not, but it's a net negative for them, which means that we (folks who abstain until they stop arming a genocide) did show them. You said that sarcastically...but like...we did. We don't know yet whether they'll change course or not, but at the very least you can say we showed them it matters from a purely Machiavellian perspective.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I had a long chat with you about this recently. And I don't think I said "screw you fascist" or "who needs a plan?" And I think I stated it pretty clearly

That’s true, that was not you. We did have a good chat and iirc you had voted for Dems up until Harris? I forget but you weren’t against voting, you just had the single issue that defined all others.

Not voting for them until they stop arming a genocide is a perfectly clear way of staking that position. If literally no votes are held back for that modicum of decency then they have absolutely no reason to change.

Yeah, but that’s where we are now and it’s very very bad. I disagree that change of the kind you’re looking for will come about through throwing the election to avowed fascists, but it is at least a defined position with room to move forward, which is a lot more than some of the other intransigent non-voters.

[–] brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago

I think "throwing the election" is overstating it. Harris lost votes because she decided to continue arming a genocide. The democrats know that...if they didn't know it before (doubt), they do now. Their position cost them votes. That's what their post-mortem says, according to Axios anyway. So if they don't change course, they're choosing to have fewer votes. They really really should not risk choosing to have fewer votes.

load more comments (14 replies)