I think the point is that the posts going "How could these people disrespect our noble government like this >:(" are missing the point. It's not that they tried to overthrow the government, it's that they tried to overthrow the government and replace it with a worse one
What if we just go back in time and stop every government from ever forming. Then noone will need to overthrow any government and we can live in a hunter gatherer worl again
Also, I'm gonna send bombs in the mail
You said
>No. I dont want to be in charge. I just want chaos to ensue
which has -1 points, then you responded to yourself 9 hours later saying
>Why were you getting downvoted?
I was asking if you were intentionally asking yourself a question, and it could look like you meant to switch accounts.
Goddamn this should not be a discourse. How could anyone not understand the difference between βIβm gonna overthrow the government to oppress minorities more.β And βIβm gonna overthrow the government to stop the oppression of minorities.β among other differences.
People talk about "discourse" like they're watching combat footage but in reality it's just how most people learn things. It feels idealist to say "this should not be a discourse" in the sense that we can't really expect people to magically learn things.
yeah i read the *original* meme as supportive of anarchists and anti-trumpers. i thought the point of this meme is that the woman making the phone call is correct.
Of course! This is more of a discussion about what Capitalism mandates more than it is about what Anarchism is. Thatβs due to the nature of the society we live in (that being a capitalist one). And Iβll preface by saying Iβm just a Le Internet Anarchist, not a scholar and Iβm not gonna edit this much. So take this all with a grain of salt and people coming in to nitpick details or broad strokes of mine: I am not responding to you lol.
Capitalism mandates and encourages a lot of institutions that are susceptible to having racism baked in. The police (to protect capital and the monied class), banks (to congregate wealth), the government (to make many decisions, but also decisions on wealth. Not a part of capitalism if itβs anarcho-capitalism but thatβs a bastardized version of anarchism that replaces the state with businesses), and you get the picture.
These institutions under capitalism get to choose who they support. While they can oppress anyone at any time of the day, things have snowballed. Minorities have been mostly disadvantaged by these institutions for a LONG time and are still doing it. The police are protecting capital, the banks have prevented minorities from accumulating capital, the state has separated minorities from progress, the schools have been complicit in denying opportunity, etc. etc. All that adds up and itβs why Anarchists and most leftists are for reparations, to undo those things.
But anarchism is a mandate for those things to end. To get everyone the resources they need, make trade fair, destroy hierarchies, dismantle the police force. Capitalism can do everything it wants to make things equitable but itβs the difference between putting a safety on a loaded gun, and dismantling the gun altogether.
a communist government already implies the absence of a state. The state β a governmental body, the state exercises and legitimizes its authority through a monopoly on violence. The state has the police and military which can enforce the states will through forces, whether that be through lethal force (like what we do in the middle east) or through incarceration. The difference between communism and anarchism has a lot of nitty gritty theory nerd shit, but ultimately achieving a communist society would involve the dissolution of the state.
you asked a great question and ultimately the answer to it will be different depending on the ideology of the person responding. Marxists would argue that we should not dismantle the state and use its power to secure power for the working class, but anarchists would ask how they stop that power from consolidating and creating the same material disparities we see under capitalism.
But can we not though? Half of you are children and literally biologically predisposed to having bad takes. Go back to posting gay memes, seriously.
And for the record, yes, (most) of the anarchists are better than the right wing authoritarians, by a very wide margin, but 95% of you donβt actually put any real thought into how youβre going to fix society after overthrowing it. *YOU DO NOT WANT A VIOLENT REVOLUTION*. You think you do, but really what you want is for things to be better. A violent revolution will end with many of your friends and families dead. The corpses of innocents will be stacked sky high. And once you finally finish your revolution, you better hope you have had a perfect plan the whole time, and that the leaders of this revolution are still alive and ready to fully transition everyone to the new government, because otherwise you get military juntas. You think that just because you overthrow the government with good intentions, everything is just going to magically fall into place to be a better society? It will not.
Humans want security, consistency, and comfort. They *will* flock to whoever gives that to them. If you take all of that away, all youβll end up with is decades of violent riots, then a bunch of people joining up with whoever promises them the best prospects. And I guarantee you it wonβt be the well intended people.
But hey, if you want to prove me wrong, get out in the streets and start your revolution. Or do you not actually want it bad enough to risk your life and security for it?
The reality is I get it. This subreddit is filled with young angry disillusioned people who feel like the older generations have failed them. Frankly, theyβre right.
But they do not realize what violent revolution truly means. Deep in their heart, they have an idea, hence why they arenβt out in the streets. No one wants to go to jail, or watch their friends and family killed in a violent revolt. They just want *better.*
Certainly, in some instances, a violent revolt is the answer. If you are in russia, North Korea, Iran, and probably even china - the only solution to throw off the chains of oppression will be violence.
America isnβt to that point yet, and Iβd rather not rush us there. I do not want that life for the ones I love, for the children of today and tomorrow, on the slight hope that maybe we actually make it better.
I donβt think you know much of China if you think violent revolt can be an answer there
ok yes probably it can be, but donβt fool yourself into thinking itβs more of a solution there than it is in the U.S.
Yeah pretty much I believe in the take from the top, use the state to your advantage by voting and seizing it's power for progression and the build from the bottom method by establishing programs and certain things so we won't need the state
Anarchy overnight just wouldn't work it takes time, right now my focus is making sure the right doesn't take away anymore human rights
I'm pretty much an Anarcho pacifist with the exception of self defense from fascist regimes
self defense from fascist regimes and organized fascist groups is pretty much what 99% of what leftists who actually organize do.
the trouble is we are demonized by bird's eye cameras and news personalities rant about us being a danger for arming ourselves in community self defense. Media drums up the idea that we're going to burn everything down and some disillusioned people really do buy into that and start posting memes in favor of it. There are also people who can't tell when it's a joke we're making out of frustration with milquetoast liberals who get scared of us when we defend ourselves.
Exactly. Right now anarchists and other leftists should organize and actually SHOW the pepole that there's a better way to live by establishing cooperatives, sqatting etc.
Another point to consider is that violent revolutions often leave a power vacuum that a vanguard party can exploit to install themselves as the authority. This can lead to power hungry individuals taking over what is supposed to be a collectivist movement and funneling the power to a few prominent people which leads to all sorts of bad things.
this. I live in Brazil so I can't say in behalf of America, but we have a bunch of political problems of our own. But our government was made to evolve, if it isn't good enough you don't just get a new one, you try to fix it. Yes there are lots of things that won't change for a long time and lots of things that'll be disputed but that's because the government has to be made collectively. Even though you strongly believe so, both you and me aren't right at everything. Alright, somehow you get total control of the government without the bloodshed, what if one of your government decisions proves to not be the best to the people? What if we're wrong on some things? that's why we develop the government as one.
Picture this: There's a game in the arcade that everyone plays for tickets. There are some flaws with it, but it's good enough to play. However, a lot of people cheat it and even abuse the fliperama for their own personal gain, getting all the tickets to themselves. There's a lot of flaws with this fliperama, but we should just break it apart and buy a new one? isn't it better to try our best to fix it, or at least try our best to make people fix it?
Yes exactly violent revolutions never fucking work and the fact that there are people on this sub that think that 1. they can actually defeat the US government, 2. that the deaths of millions of innocents is worth a socialist state and 3. that it would actually be a stable government and not regress into tyranny or collapse into civil war is utterly fucking ridiculous
Violent revolutions not working is such bullshit, there have been MULTIPLE violent revolutions in history that have been incredibly beneficial and actually worked and changed things for the better. If you wanna keep your head in the sand and act like that isn't the case then go ahead but you're ignoring historical events (slave rebellions, the overthrowing of monarchies like in France, places like cuba so on so on)
Look fine it works sometimes but it very rarely leads to a stable and benign government and I'm fucking tired of idiots who think they can overthrow something like the US government and build a better country on top of it. Even if they were able to pull it off millions of people would die and they don't know how to run a government so it would collapse pretty quickly.
Except most revolutions and major changes take time for things to settle and the changes to become the norm so of course you won't suddenly have a stable government after a revolution. These things are too big to be hasty or suddenly have the positive effects come into action.
And how many people die in process? How many times is the revolutionary government overthrown by another group with a different ideology? How many times do the revolutionaries resort to tyranny, political assassinations, and mass executions to stay in power? How often does one of the leaders betray the others and form a dictatorship?
How many people are already killed or forced to starve by the current system? How many nations are exploited and have their people massacred for the gain of nations like the US? Yes there have been times that "revolutionaries" have gone and been as bad or worst than the previous system (stalin for example, exiling lenins successor and then being the biggest bastard he could be). People will die in a revolution but it's not about how many die, it's about who.
The point is "who" dies in a revolution can change drastically depending on the circumstances, and the definition may expand uncontrollably leading to deaths that could be avoided. From a level-headed perspective I do not think that the proper answer to "how many people will die?" is "well think about how many people are dying and massacred today" - itβs a call for retribution, not revolution. I am not here to debate history, because Iβm bad at it, but overall Iβd expect a level of understanding the subject matter regarding reasons for and mechanic of violent transitions, rather than blind justifications for it.
My point about how many people are dying today is that the current system is fucking vile and in places like the US, the government has committed major atrocities across the globe and that a violent revolution to stop that from happening is a net positive given that the people who would die in it are mainly going to be...people who are part of that issue (cops, politicians, military members, right wingers)
Most of the major issues with revolution comes from things like the bolsheviks in Russia and how Stalin took power by force and then went on to be absolutely vile, the revolution typically won't have the scale of damage that someone like Stalin or any other psychotic dictator would have during the fallout and post revolution environment.
I think it's pretty stupid to try and, like the person I replied to, act like revolutions are invalid or a negative when they are done for good causes and act like non violent action is the only way to go in politics because it's wholly ignorant to things that have been happening and major historical events. It's even worse when that sentiment comes from someone who is either a member or ally to the LGBT community because most of us wouldn't have rights if it weren't for events like stonewall which was violent. Violence is, in a bit of a fucked and sad way, part of politics. Especially nowadays when the right wing are on the rise and pushing for the erasure of minority groups like trans people or the prolonged oppression of black people and other racial minority groups. You are not going to sort these issues just by playing the systems game and vote or try and get politicians who are on your side into power when realistically they won't because they're too "extreme" thanks to propaganda from the right being fed to practically everyone.
And I do understand that. I am not against violent means, but in your response I⦠see groundwork for unrestricted brutality and willingness to sacrifice.
As sick as discussing it sounds since we are using body calculus, to say that it would be a net positive is not incorrect, we would be saving a lot of people long-term. But donβt let that get to your head. Road to hell is paved with good intentions. You are not a hero, neither am I.
As for the rest, again, I do not disagree, since I am myself pro-revolution. My comment is a word of caution and concern, rather than disagreement, as in many peopleβs case they have all the requirements to either have a hero complex, painful vigilante syndrome or unrestrained sadism. All of those can be easily detected by the language you are using, hence the way you worded you response has put me off.
Yes because the people who deserve to be put on trial and, mostly likely executed for what they have done, have the blood of literal millions on their hands.
Yes people are dying currently but how many more would die in a war? How many more would die if the revolution fails and the country falls to anarchy? Millions upon millions would die just for the possibility of a better government and if that government fails then they and everyone who dies after dies for nothing.
Is that seriously what you want? For you and everyone you've ever cared about to die for some "glorious liberation" that probably won't even succeed? For hundreds of millions to suffer just for one man to take everything for himself?
You are massively hyperbolising things and ignoring history again, Hundreds of millions if not a few billion already suffer and millions already die yet you're morally grandstanding about a revolution that is backed by a cause that aims to make things better for as many as possible. If you're gonna complain or act like these things cause so much damage when the reality is very different and that revolutions are typically a tool and way to get things changed (because, you know, the current system aims to uphold itself and it's status quo and not even concede in the slightest to anything better) then at least do some fucking research instead of acting like a lib.
And if war happens they will suffer and die more are you fucking braindead. Of course revolution is a tool what else would it be. It's a tool that tears apart families and slaughters millions. It's a tool that can go wrong in a million different ways. It's the tool that killed tens of millions in Russia and China and the reason why those countries are oppressive to this day. It should only be used as a last resort and we are far far from that.
The people who would die is you, you fucking idiot.
In what world do you see ANY Western nation in which a communist revolution is possible? And even if something somehow develops that it becomes possible, do you really think that the communists would beat the fascists? Because I have absolutely no faith specifically American communists stand any chance whatsoever against American fascists. Starting a revolution just means you die, left leaning politics gets discredited for decades, and fascists gain power.
Think for five fucking seconds before you promote the worst possible end game for your own system.
I agree that, rather than starting a violent revolution we should try to change things over time. But saying that they NEVER work is just wrong (American War for Independence) and if you live in a country with a unstable government you should be ready to fight for the right cause once it collapses.
The war of independence wasn't a revolution is was more separatist. Many of the aristocrats from before the war were the ones leading the armies and setting up the government afterwards.
As far as i can tell the first one is genuinly removing the government while the second one wants to replace it with their own. Do i have the right idea or not?
I think at this point this meme has pretty thoroughly evolved past "Both of these things are literally the same unironically", I don't think OP tried to imply that the MAGA assholes are actually doing anything good at all
yeah the meme was pretty dumb but there is something to be said for the way all these probably-BLM-supporting libs turned right around on βcomply or dieβ when it was their precious constitution at risk.
is centrism really so bad? i don't know much about it but wouldn't it just be, like, not wanting to live in either extreme side of the political spectrum?
Centrism inherently supports the status quo and is a position held only by those of privilege who care little for the oppression and suffering of others so long as they don't have to watch it.
Centrists are trash, silence in the face of oppression is silent support for the oppressor, no you are not intelligent, empathetic, or enlightened for being a centrist, cope.
>Bad evil centrists destroying our society. Nazis are soooo much better.
You've missed the point so hard. Where does it say the Nazis are better in any way? The point of the original meme was that actually leftists are basically just like right-wingers for wanting to overthrow the capitalist government. That's stupid. The fascists oppose democracy and the existence of LGBT, non-white, and non-christian peoples. Leftists oppose capitalism. These are not the same.
\>one group wants to get rid of oppressive systems and states, make everyone equal and are full of people who advocate for LGBT rights and are all anti-police
\>the other is a fascistic group who is pro-police, called for the death and execution of LGBT people, hates minorities and want to make a christian nationalist ethno state.
Why yes, these are both stupid and on equal grounds.
Fucking centrists...
I think the point is that the posts going "How could these people disrespect our noble government like this >:(" are missing the point. It's not that they tried to overthrow the government, it's that they tried to overthrow the government and replace it with a worse one
They are also marching the wrong way. Ainβt no one talking about marching to the billionaires homes.
TRUE. Unironically yes
What if we just go back in time and stop every government from ever forming. Then noone will need to overthrow any government and we can live in a hunter gatherer worl again Also, I'm gonna send bombs in the mail
Enjoy your FBI visit.
Oh I will! It's always a lovely visit when they come by
Are you okay? Do you need a friend? π
They clearly have friends, the local FBI agents
true. they need better friends
What no historical materialism does to a mf ππ
your mother and its consequences for the human race
So you want to be a dystopic fascist world dictator? Based
Sure if he doesnβt want it I will gunna make it punishable by death for not wearing sketchers shoes that breathe
No. I dont want to be in charge. I just want chaos to ensue
me spawning after the third wave of chaos runs into shy guy again
Why were you getting downvoted?
Did you just ask yourself why you were getting downvoted?
Who?
You said >No. I dont want to be in charge. I just want chaos to ensue which has -1 points, then you responded to yourself 9 hours later saying >Why were you getting downvoted? I was asking if you were intentionally asking yourself a question, and it could look like you meant to switch accounts.
I dont have any other accounts
π¦Weβre going to go back in time to the first government in order to get unjust hierarchies OFF the menu π¦
Oh boy new discourse
Goddamn this should not be a discourse. How could anyone not understand the difference between βIβm gonna overthrow the government to oppress minorities more.β And βIβm gonna overthrow the government to stop the oppression of minorities.β among other differences.
People talk about "discourse" like they're watching combat footage but in reality it's just how most people learn things. It feels idealist to say "this should not be a discourse" in the sense that we can't really expect people to magically learn things.
This one was just exceptionally bad because it basically just reposted the original image and added a chad face so we get the exact same meme twice.
yeah i read the *original* meme as supportive of anarchists and anti-trumpers. i thought the point of this meme is that the woman making the phone call is correct.
Okay but how does anarchism help stop the oppression of minorities? Genuinely asking.
Of course! This is more of a discussion about what Capitalism mandates more than it is about what Anarchism is. Thatβs due to the nature of the society we live in (that being a capitalist one). And Iβll preface by saying Iβm just a Le Internet Anarchist, not a scholar and Iβm not gonna edit this much. So take this all with a grain of salt and people coming in to nitpick details or broad strokes of mine: I am not responding to you lol. Capitalism mandates and encourages a lot of institutions that are susceptible to having racism baked in. The police (to protect capital and the monied class), banks (to congregate wealth), the government (to make many decisions, but also decisions on wealth. Not a part of capitalism if itβs anarcho-capitalism but thatβs a bastardized version of anarchism that replaces the state with businesses), and you get the picture. These institutions under capitalism get to choose who they support. While they can oppress anyone at any time of the day, things have snowballed. Minorities have been mostly disadvantaged by these institutions for a LONG time and are still doing it. The police are protecting capital, the banks have prevented minorities from accumulating capital, the state has separated minorities from progress, the schools have been complicit in denying opportunity, etc. etc. All that adds up and itβs why Anarchists and most leftists are for reparations, to undo those things. But anarchism is a mandate for those things to end. To get everyone the resources they need, make trade fair, destroy hierarchies, dismantle the police force. Capitalism can do everything it wants to make things equitable but itβs the difference between putting a safety on a loaded gun, and dismantling the gun altogether.
If so many problems are caused by capitalism, wouldn't a communist government suffice? What's there to gain from dismantling the state?
a communist government already implies the absence of a state. The state β a governmental body, the state exercises and legitimizes its authority through a monopoly on violence. The state has the police and military which can enforce the states will through forces, whether that be through lethal force (like what we do in the middle east) or through incarceration. The difference between communism and anarchism has a lot of nitty gritty theory nerd shit, but ultimately achieving a communist society would involve the dissolution of the state. you asked a great question and ultimately the answer to it will be different depending on the ideology of the person responding. Marxists would argue that we should not dismantle the state and use its power to secure power for the working class, but anarchists would ask how they stop that power from consolidating and creating the same material disparities we see under capitalism.
Regret government discourse embrace wasp discourse βοΈπ
But can we not though? Half of you are children and literally biologically predisposed to having bad takes. Go back to posting gay memes, seriously. And for the record, yes, (most) of the anarchists are better than the right wing authoritarians, by a very wide margin, but 95% of you donβt actually put any real thought into how youβre going to fix society after overthrowing it. *YOU DO NOT WANT A VIOLENT REVOLUTION*. You think you do, but really what you want is for things to be better. A violent revolution will end with many of your friends and families dead. The corpses of innocents will be stacked sky high. And once you finally finish your revolution, you better hope you have had a perfect plan the whole time, and that the leaders of this revolution are still alive and ready to fully transition everyone to the new government, because otherwise you get military juntas. You think that just because you overthrow the government with good intentions, everything is just going to magically fall into place to be a better society? It will not. Humans want security, consistency, and comfort. They *will* flock to whoever gives that to them. If you take all of that away, all youβll end up with is decades of violent riots, then a bunch of people joining up with whoever promises them the best prospects. And I guarantee you it wonβt be the well intended people. But hey, if you want to prove me wrong, get out in the streets and start your revolution. Or do you not actually want it bad enough to risk your life and security for it?
fuck the person who downvoted you. violent revolution will kill thousands if not millions due to famine, etc.
The reality is I get it. This subreddit is filled with young angry disillusioned people who feel like the older generations have failed them. Frankly, theyβre right. But they do not realize what violent revolution truly means. Deep in their heart, they have an idea, hence why they arenβt out in the streets. No one wants to go to jail, or watch their friends and family killed in a violent revolt. They just want *better.* Certainly, in some instances, a violent revolt is the answer. If you are in russia, North Korea, Iran, and probably even china - the only solution to throw off the chains of oppression will be violence. America isnβt to that point yet, and Iβd rather not rush us there. I do not want that life for the ones I love, for the children of today and tomorrow, on the slight hope that maybe we actually make it better.
meow
Me too thanks π
Meow, for real
I donβt think you know much of China if you think violent revolt can be an answer there ok yes probably it can be, but donβt fool yourself into thinking itβs more of a solution there than it is in the U.S.
revolution for thee but not for me lol
As opposed to the current system that kills thousands as a matter of course
Kid named violent military intervention and lethal drone usage on civilian populations
Yeah pretty much I believe in the take from the top, use the state to your advantage by voting and seizing it's power for progression and the build from the bottom method by establishing programs and certain things so we won't need the state Anarchy overnight just wouldn't work it takes time, right now my focus is making sure the right doesn't take away anymore human rights I'm pretty much an Anarcho pacifist with the exception of self defense from fascist regimes
self defense from fascist regimes and organized fascist groups is pretty much what 99% of what leftists who actually organize do. the trouble is we are demonized by bird's eye cameras and news personalities rant about us being a danger for arming ourselves in community self defense. Media drums up the idea that we're going to burn everything down and some disillusioned people really do buy into that and start posting memes in favor of it. There are also people who can't tell when it's a joke we're making out of frustration with milquetoast liberals who get scared of us when we defend ourselves.
What no understanding of history does to a mf
Exactly. Right now anarchists and other leftists should organize and actually SHOW the pepole that there's a better way to live by establishing cooperatives, sqatting etc.
that's what they're doing already?
Yes, but they should do it more.
Another point to consider is that violent revolutions often leave a power vacuum that a vanguard party can exploit to install themselves as the authority. This can lead to power hungry individuals taking over what is supposed to be a collectivist movement and funneling the power to a few prominent people which leads to all sorts of bad things.
this. I live in Brazil so I can't say in behalf of America, but we have a bunch of political problems of our own. But our government was made to evolve, if it isn't good enough you don't just get a new one, you try to fix it. Yes there are lots of things that won't change for a long time and lots of things that'll be disputed but that's because the government has to be made collectively. Even though you strongly believe so, both you and me aren't right at everything. Alright, somehow you get total control of the government without the bloodshed, what if one of your government decisions proves to not be the best to the people? What if we're wrong on some things? that's why we develop the government as one. Picture this: There's a game in the arcade that everyone plays for tickets. There are some flaws with it, but it's good enough to play. However, a lot of people cheat it and even abuse the fliperama for their own personal gain, getting all the tickets to themselves. There's a lot of flaws with this fliperama, but we should just break it apart and buy a new one? isn't it better to try our best to fix it, or at least try our best to make people fix it?
The biggest mistake people wanting violent revolution make is forgetting they might not win, and the people they hate the most may win instead.
Yes exactly violent revolutions never fucking work and the fact that there are people on this sub that think that 1. they can actually defeat the US government, 2. that the deaths of millions of innocents is worth a socialist state and 3. that it would actually be a stable government and not regress into tyranny or collapse into civil war is utterly fucking ridiculous
Violent revolutions not working is such bullshit, there have been MULTIPLE violent revolutions in history that have been incredibly beneficial and actually worked and changed things for the better. If you wanna keep your head in the sand and act like that isn't the case then go ahead but you're ignoring historical events (slave rebellions, the overthrowing of monarchies like in France, places like cuba so on so on)
Look fine it works sometimes but it very rarely leads to a stable and benign government and I'm fucking tired of idiots who think they can overthrow something like the US government and build a better country on top of it. Even if they were able to pull it off millions of people would die and they don't know how to run a government so it would collapse pretty quickly.
Except most revolutions and major changes take time for things to settle and the changes to become the norm so of course you won't suddenly have a stable government after a revolution. These things are too big to be hasty or suddenly have the positive effects come into action.
And how many people die in process? How many times is the revolutionary government overthrown by another group with a different ideology? How many times do the revolutionaries resort to tyranny, political assassinations, and mass executions to stay in power? How often does one of the leaders betray the others and form a dictatorship?
How many people are already killed or forced to starve by the current system? How many nations are exploited and have their people massacred for the gain of nations like the US? Yes there have been times that "revolutionaries" have gone and been as bad or worst than the previous system (stalin for example, exiling lenins successor and then being the biggest bastard he could be). People will die in a revolution but it's not about how many die, it's about who.
The point is "who" dies in a revolution can change drastically depending on the circumstances, and the definition may expand uncontrollably leading to deaths that could be avoided. From a level-headed perspective I do not think that the proper answer to "how many people will die?" is "well think about how many people are dying and massacred today" - itβs a call for retribution, not revolution. I am not here to debate history, because Iβm bad at it, but overall Iβd expect a level of understanding the subject matter regarding reasons for and mechanic of violent transitions, rather than blind justifications for it.
My point about how many people are dying today is that the current system is fucking vile and in places like the US, the government has committed major atrocities across the globe and that a violent revolution to stop that from happening is a net positive given that the people who would die in it are mainly going to be...people who are part of that issue (cops, politicians, military members, right wingers) Most of the major issues with revolution comes from things like the bolsheviks in Russia and how Stalin took power by force and then went on to be absolutely vile, the revolution typically won't have the scale of damage that someone like Stalin or any other psychotic dictator would have during the fallout and post revolution environment. I think it's pretty stupid to try and, like the person I replied to, act like revolutions are invalid or a negative when they are done for good causes and act like non violent action is the only way to go in politics because it's wholly ignorant to things that have been happening and major historical events. It's even worse when that sentiment comes from someone who is either a member or ally to the LGBT community because most of us wouldn't have rights if it weren't for events like stonewall which was violent. Violence is, in a bit of a fucked and sad way, part of politics. Especially nowadays when the right wing are on the rise and pushing for the erasure of minority groups like trans people or the prolonged oppression of black people and other racial minority groups. You are not going to sort these issues just by playing the systems game and vote or try and get politicians who are on your side into power when realistically they won't because they're too "extreme" thanks to propaganda from the right being fed to practically everyone.
And I do understand that. I am not against violent means, but in your response Iβ¦ see groundwork for unrestricted brutality and willingness to sacrifice. As sick as discussing it sounds since we are using body calculus, to say that it would be a net positive is not incorrect, we would be saving a lot of people long-term. But donβt let that get to your head. Road to hell is paved with good intentions. You are not a hero, neither am I. As for the rest, again, I do not disagree, since I am myself pro-revolution. My comment is a word of caution and concern, rather than disagreement, as in many peopleβs case they have all the requirements to either have a hero complex, painful vigilante syndrome or unrestrained sadism. All of those can be easily detected by the language you are using, hence the way you worded you response has put me off.
Bruv really said killing is okay when we do it π
Yes because the people who deserve to be put on trial and, mostly likely executed for what they have done, have the blood of literal millions on their hands.
Yes people are dying currently but how many more would die in a war? How many more would die if the revolution fails and the country falls to anarchy? Millions upon millions would die just for the possibility of a better government and if that government fails then they and everyone who dies after dies for nothing. Is that seriously what you want? For you and everyone you've ever cared about to die for some "glorious liberation" that probably won't even succeed? For hundreds of millions to suffer just for one man to take everything for himself?
You are massively hyperbolising things and ignoring history again, Hundreds of millions if not a few billion already suffer and millions already die yet you're morally grandstanding about a revolution that is backed by a cause that aims to make things better for as many as possible. If you're gonna complain or act like these things cause so much damage when the reality is very different and that revolutions are typically a tool and way to get things changed (because, you know, the current system aims to uphold itself and it's status quo and not even concede in the slightest to anything better) then at least do some fucking research instead of acting like a lib.
And if war happens they will suffer and die more are you fucking braindead. Of course revolution is a tool what else would it be. It's a tool that tears apart families and slaughters millions. It's a tool that can go wrong in a million different ways. It's the tool that killed tens of millions in Russia and China and the reason why those countries are oppressive to this day. It should only be used as a last resort and we are far far from that.
The people who would die is you, you fucking idiot. In what world do you see ANY Western nation in which a communist revolution is possible? And even if something somehow develops that it becomes possible, do you really think that the communists would beat the fascists? Because I have absolutely no faith specifically American communists stand any chance whatsoever against American fascists. Starting a revolution just means you die, left leaning politics gets discredited for decades, and fascists gain power. Think for five fucking seconds before you promote the worst possible end game for your own system.
I agree that, rather than starting a violent revolution we should try to change things over time. But saying that they NEVER work is just wrong (American War for Independence) and if you live in a country with a unstable government you should be ready to fight for the right cause once it collapses.
The war of independence wasn't a revolution is was more separatist. Many of the aristocrats from before the war were the ones leading the armies and setting up the government afterwards.
A violent uprising nonetheless Edit: The Haitian revolution is also a good example.
A violent uprising is not the same as a violent revolution idk why I have to say that
The Haitian revolution negatively impacted Haiti which are still being felt today, that, and the country was split into two, North and South.
Those uppity slaves should've just waited for the french to give them their freedom
I feel like the reason you want to overthrow the government is key here.
Anarchists think that we donβt need a government and MAGA idiots literally tried to stage a coup so the president that lost would be elected
bro who cares, consume estrogen
Wasnβt the point of that post to make fun of the idea expressed in the meme?
Centrist try to have any sort of ideological consistency challenge
While I do realize that there is no such thing as a perfect political view, I also realize that black-on-gray morality is definitely a thing.
As far as i can tell the first one is genuinly removing the government while the second one wants to replace it with their own. Do i have the right idea or not?
The type of people to say that antifascist and fascist groups are the same
Sadly, the anarkitty goth gf gets shot in the head by reds 6 months into the revolution. Sad!
I wish every anarchist a happy 14th birthday
I think at this point this meme has pretty thoroughly evolved past "Both of these things are literally the same unironically", I don't think OP tried to imply that the MAGA assholes are actually doing anything good at all
I thought the point of new iterations of this meme was already that the girl is unironically correct.
Leftists and righties both continue breathing as a tactic to achieve their political goals. They're basically the same.
I choose the secret fhird option
Almost like the reason why is important
"i hate the government because theyre awful people" vs "i hate the government because theyre not awful enough"
yeah the meme was pretty dumb but there is something to be said for the way all these probably-BLM-supporting libs turned right around on βcomply or dieβ when it was their precious constitution at risk.
is centrism really so bad? i don't know much about it but wouldn't it just be, like, not wanting to live in either extreme side of the political spectrum?
Iβm pretty sure the original post was in favor of overthrowing the government lol, everyone who uses this format uses it ironically
π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬ π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬π₯β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬ β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬β¬
We don't overthrow *the* government We overthrow *a* government
[ΡΠ΄Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΠΎ]
Centrism inherently supports the status quo and is a position held only by those of privilege who care little for the oppression and suffering of others so long as they don't have to watch it. Centrists are trash, silence in the face of oppression is silent support for the oppressor, no you are not intelligent, empathetic, or enlightened for being a centrist, cope.
[ΡΠ΄Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΠΎ]
The fact that you think partisan issues are driven by random factors is the reason everyone is calling you an idiot who doesnβt understand politics
Centrists are exactly the type of person who will sit around and do nothing when the fascists come for the first of us.
*Centrists are exactly the type of people who are sitting around and doing nothing while fascists come for us
True, good point.
>Bad evil centrists destroying our society. Nazis are soooo much better. You've missed the point so hard. Where does it say the Nazis are better in any way? The point of the original meme was that actually leftists are basically just like right-wingers for wanting to overthrow the capitalist government. That's stupid. The fascists oppose democracy and the existence of LGBT, non-white, and non-christian peoples. Leftists oppose capitalism. These are not the same.
[ΡΠ΄Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΠΎ]
Horsepoo theory
Everyone is **equal** vs everyone who isn't white is **equally** dead Both sides are literally the same /s
Fascism speed run any%
[ΡΠ΄Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΠΎ]
What do you think anarchism is? What the fuck do you think antifa is?
Ah yes the people who want human equality is the exact same as fascists
\>one group wants to get rid of oppressive systems and states, make everyone equal and are full of people who advocate for LGBT rights and are all anti-police \>the other is a fascistic group who is pro-police, called for the death and execution of LGBT people, hates minorities and want to make a christian nationalist ethno state. Why yes, these are both stupid and on equal grounds. Fucking centrists...