275
leftism is bestism
(quokk.au)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2025
275 points (95.1% liked)
Political Memes
10266 readers
217 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
Both things can be true.
One step at a time.
Yeah, splitting up isn't a great thing right now. Let's team up together and fight the nazis.
It's almost like some people here desperately want to create division in the left.
Glad to see it backfiring on one post.
Im willing to work with anyone who has a real backbone and is acturally willing to fight fascism. People who reject all fascism even a compromised fascism lite.
You're the only person in here talking about splitting up?
Let's just make sure when this is over, that actual leftists are put in charge so we don't get a repeat of this in 20 years.
Dude, the leftists shitting on liberals thing is extremely strong around here. You would think the only enemy in sight is the Democratic Party to hear some tell it. Oh look, here comes someone right now to do exactly that!
The Democratic Party is the insidious great apologizer for Capital. The Democrat Party funds the wars, were the original kings of "mass deportation", and have been the architects of numerous an austerity policy that has betrayed and immiserated the working class.
The Democratic Party is the more advanced villain, as they wrap their rhetoric in the language of moralism to make them immune to criticism from more "left wing" moralizers. Which is why many are stuck arguing to death in petty fights with the rhetoric of reform and moralism of the Left Wing of Capital while the republicans are more openly evil who are easy to dismiss and not argue with.
Only through recognizing both the Democratic and Republican party as institutions of class control will you ever make progress.
Yes Dems are antilib/antileft as well
Leftist don't want to get organized to be a third party or vote as left as they can in major parties. They won't be in charge because they don't want to be engaged.
People who are not represented by the two party system are disenfranchised by First-past-the-post voting.
Electoral Reform Videos
First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems
STAR voting
Alternative vote
Ranked Choice voting
Range Voting
Single Transferable Vote
Mixed Member Proportional representation
Shitlibs can't do anything but blame the left for their failures and deny we exist. And suck Nazi dick. They can fall in line or fuck off–if a shitlib wants to volunteer as a warm body for something I'm doing without trying to subvert it I won't turn them away, but I doubt that would happen–i have seen zero interest in coalitions or opposing fascism.
Please feel free to prove me wrong.
What they were trying to say is now is not the time to divide eachother
Cool maybe they should fall in line then.
OR maybe you should team up on the incremental progress for now, and then show them why more work is needed. You don't need to be the divisive one.
Some of the people you see that are dumping on any incremental progress are pro-authoritarian, accelerationists. I believe most of those ones are bad actors/bots though. Any real leftist is wanting to help people however they can/actively helping those in their communities.
Weird how 'compromise to a common end' always means 'do my thing and ignore that other thing and also ignore what you wanted'.
Why are you pretending like that's what they said? One concept is a progression of the same idea but taken beyond the other one - you're just claiming it's not because you want to be divisive and pretend like you're holding the morally correct position to trigger people.
It's transparent and like... nobody seems to be taking the bait, so why are you even still trying?
And this is why you don't have allies.
Can you kindly provide some examples of what you’re talking about?
of a thing not happening? um, sure; here i guess.
Great! Can you please explain some of the specific things you are doing? You mentioned this in your previous comment. Specifically the part about coalitions and such.
No, sorry.
Cool! Was this just a lie then?
Probably not. Guess we'll never know.
Well, you still have ample chance to amend yourself and speak from the heart, if that’s something important to you.
I'm not in the habbit of explaining or doxxing myself too hard, sorry.
If you show up, I'll probably offer you something to do. If you don't, I suppose we'll never meet.
You won’t convince many people if you aren’t willing to explain yourself; how can someone trust one that isn’t willing to meet them halfway? I encourage you to not say who you are, but what you stand for.
I think we can both agree that authoritarians are bad, and that what we are seeing now from the right is pushes for power by authoritarians.
Okay. Abstractly I'm for personal autonomy proliferation of possibilities and the cultivation/nurturing/flourishing of the potential of all intelligence–ai if that ever exists, whales, visiting aliens if that happens, and whatever else; even hypothetically some apes, if you can believe that–individually and collectively.
More viscerally I'm for banishing inefficiency precarity exploitation and unjustifiable bullshit, making the world more fun/interesting, and finding opportunities to grow in those considered finished/complete or discarded by bourgeoise society. Also pretty opposed to pointless wasteful destruction of things that are unrecoverable or expensive to recover. I've got a lot of anger about delusional superstitions theological and otherwise that justify awful bullshit that prevents and destroys the good stuff.
This means in practical terms that I'm extremely hostile to police, means testing, borders, hierarchy, private property, money, laws in general, bureaucracy, and probably a lot of other stuff you think is necessary or elemental to the way the world works. I will not be saying what I'm in favor of in the day-to-day here–too unusual.
This sounds pretty uncompromising because it is. I haven't had much connection to established society and ideas in my adult life except by conflict, and was explicitly excluded as a child. I have gained nothing from it except by force or deception, and so had no positive social/material bonds with it to guide my intellectual/emotional growth or relationships that would be stressed by radical ideas. Nobody has compromised with me, so I have compromised on nothing, which is unfortunate–i quite enjoy co-creation if the built world and perceptions thereof. Of all the people to seek common ground with; I am not the ideal. There are others you could ask.
I appreciate your genuine response, thank you for taking your time to reply to me.
Right on, I agree with you that it would be worth promoting those potentials for intelligence like you said. I could even see an argument where we share the genes of understanding complex language that we have, although I feel we should try to slow aging more/eliminate more diseases/cancers before doing that much.
To me, it sounds like you want things to be better than they are, because you know they can be. I feel the same way about wanting things to be better, to experience the fun and to find joy in the unexpected/unknown.
Am I right in hearing that you want to pursue your passions, but that economically we don’t reward those routes? If that is the case, I think it’s a modern tragedy that society is not rewarding those with heart and passion to pursue the path they want to walk.
I feel the same way as you about wasteful destruction of things that that are damaged or hard to recover. Just because it’s not perfect, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have history or meaning behind it.
I think that’s a fair take, the paradox of tolerance certainly applies to what you’re talking about with many beliefs out there.
I think many of the things you listed make sense to have gripes with in one way or another, especially in this day and age.
For instance, the means test you mentioned. Why is there a threshold for help? Why is it that once you go slightly past the threshold that you lose all of those safety nets from the benefit programs?
I mean, why do we have these arbitrary borders? We’re all human after all. Can’t we just come together and have a unified global society already? At the least you would think traveling wouldn’t be such a big deal, yet alone immigrating to another country just to live.
I don’t think most things should necessarily need hierarchies. I do like that some co-op businesses are out there for that reason, although not as many as there could/should be.
Personally, I’m fine with some forms of private property, but I do think there should be way more public property than there is. For instance, I feel that most if not all private apartments should be public apartments. I would personally like a house someday to have the space to raise a family. Technically, I have no issue with the state itself owning the house property if it was easier for future generations to have access to houses as well.
I don’t think money itself is bad, but how we allocate it is just bonkers. I mean, the fact that there are billionaires when people go hungry and don’t have a roof over their heads is an absurdity. If we taxed the billionaires and big corporations so that everyone had access to something like a Universal Basic Income and other progressive programs/housing, that would go a long ways towards making the world a better place.
That’s okay, it’s better to not mention it if it’s too unique to you.
I’m sorry that you’ve been fighting alone for so long and in such an uncaring environment at that. We’re not built to walk a lonely path -one without warmth, kindness, and consideration shown to us. I feel like you’re being a bit hard on yourself here, no one’s perfect after all. It sounds to me like you do care about helping others, it’s difficult when your voice is not being heard though.
Is our next step going to be passing conservative legislation and pretending its a win for 15 years again?
Specifically that first one, then we break your legs and shackle you to something so you dont get ideas.
Walking in the direction of only one.
Because the other is merely a stop on the way.
If you don't strive for the best option, you'll settle for compromise.
That's what politics is, compromise. That's why "they" say to shoot for the biggest thing you want, because half way there is still better than when you first started.
No, that's what centrism is, compromise with the right.
We fight for what we want, and we don't stop halfway sorry.
Sure you do buddy, how is that working out?
I’ve seen more of this type of accelerationist, cultist talk cropping up lately. As a leftist-liberal, I don’t think it’s mutually exclusive where we can’t be pushing for that incremental positive change while still wanting more.
The fact that over 50% of those on the right, who are in power, don’t want positive change at all -even that incremental change- is what is the worrying sign.
We should be pushing for progressives to be in office and implement these progressive policies at the state level, as it’s clear that we have a big up-hill challenge to get any progressive policies passed federally.
Did you reply to the wrong comment?
Nah I’m agreeing with you; I’m talking about the type of person you replied to though.
When was the last time a lib compromised with a socialist or anarchist? With anyone to the left of mecha-thatcher?
Do you even know off the top of your head the compromise positions on police abolition Zionism worker control of the means of production/not living in exploitative tyranny half your waking life abolition of borders universal housing bodily autonomy massive inequality/billionaires the elimination of precarity or environmental sustainability? Like, have you ever heard any of them articulated by a lib?
Edit: has anyone ever in their life heard a lib articulate what a compromise with the left might look like? Once? One single time?
Leftists always have to shut up and fall in line. If we don't we're fracturing and we're the problem, yet the centrist libs never make an effort to compromise or meet our modest expectations on the value of human life.
I think this stance isn’t quite the full picture. The issue I see in the US is that over 50% of the people in power federally, Republicans, don’t want even those very moderate positions voted in.
It’s not an issue of leftists being too left, but an issue of there not being enough people sold on leftists views in all the red/purple states. When the 40 hour a week requirement isn’t even getting sold, of course those people further right aren’t voting in a more considerate option.
Really, I feel the issues stem from many people believing that we were close to getting the liberal goals passed federally. Now, it looks like we’re starting back several steps with how much 2024 was a backstep. At this point, trying to get those leftist programs implemented at the state level is the most logical thing to do, specifically in blue states.
I think blue states held off on implementing most of these programs since it is very expensive and it would have made way more sense to fund all these programs federally, but that’s not realistic now. Blue states need to be willing to go into debt to fund these progressive programs, and only after they are implemented and the people are benefiting is it likely that purple/red states also buy into trying these programs.
Don’t get me wrong, the corporate Dems aren’t the ones trying to get these programs implemented at the state level. For that reason, we should primary the non-progressive Dems. Better yet, we should try to get an alternative voting system implemented in each of our states so we get more politicians like Mamdani in office.
Right but have you literally ever heard a shitlib say what compromise with the left might look like? Like ever? Any proposal? An elected figure or your cringe shitlib aunt or literally any of them?
Or do they just mean 'compromise the left' as in 'to a permanent end'?
What do you mean? Compromise on what issues exactly?
I agree with pretty much everything under the sun with left leaning policy. I’m a leftist-liberal since I don’t think those points are inherently mutually exclusive.
Gave a shortish list elsewhere in this thread, find it or don't.
Because the ratio of libs to leftists is like 10:1 at minimum. Obviously they control the conversation, that's how democracy is supposed to work. We can't control the conversation from the minority.