this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2026
584 points (99.8% liked)

Memes of Production

1493 readers
1276 users here now

Seize the Memes of Production

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 7 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

You have 1,000 slaves. Do you accept freeing 500 instead of fighting for all to be free?

Fight for what’s right, fuck compromise that perpetuates suffering. That’s what centrists do.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

You refused to compromise, and now you have 1000 slaves. But at least you can tell yourself you did the right thing, as the slaves, slave on.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Because refusal to compromise = never succeeding?

You’d be in favour having some slave states and some non-slave states instead of fighting a civil war to end slavery.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 4 hours ago

No, I'd compromise to buy time, until I can stab the confederates in the back, duh.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 3 points 13 hours ago

You have 1,000 slaves. Do you accept freeing 500 instead of fighting for all to be free?

Accepting freeing 500 doesn't mean stopping the fight to free the other 500.

Should the Union during the US Civil War have refused to free any slaves until it could guarantee all slaves would be free?

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

Do the thing that helps now and work to do the things that help in the future as well. Why would I allow 500 slaves to remain in servitude just because I can't free all 1,000 right now?

[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Does freeing 500 take 1% of the effort of freeing all 1k? Do the 500 first and then start working towards freeing the rest.

Now, this requires actually doing the second part, but some good actually done is better than all the good wished for but none done.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

People get complacent after doing some, it’s always better to do it all than half arse it and promise to come back later.

Plus it y’know actually stops the suffering rather than prolonging it but lesser.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

People get complacent after doing some, it’s always better to do it all than half arse it and promise to come back later.

To some degree, this is correct - people tend to leave behind the passion once they've done something about it. But this is a reason to do as much as one can with the circumstances given, regardless of worrying whether it is 'too radical' to last; not a reason to refuse to do anything that doesn't immediately result in the end-goal of your ideology.

Put another way, this argument could be used to oppose anarchist organizing - after people do a little for the revolution, like organizing, they tend to get complacent. Only immediate and violent action in service to revolution is moral.

Plus it y’know actually stops the suffering rather than prolonging it but lesser.

But it doesn't stop the suffering until it succeeds, if it succeeds.

Which is the better outcome? Someone wanting to save 10,000 lives, but failing to save anyone's life; or someone who wants to save 1,000 lives, thinking it's all they can do (rightly or wrongly), and succeeds in saving 500?

[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

It's almost like reality has nuance and shit.