41
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago

Do you not care about GENOCIDE???

/s

[-] blarth@thelemmy.club 4 points 3 weeks ago

Genocide Joe!

Making sure the party that continually starts new wars in the Middle East gets elected will surely help my cause!

“Yeah but you support GENOCIDE!”

[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago

"If it hadn't been for Genocide Joe, I'd been married long time 'go..."

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

You say 'Genocide Joe!' like he didn't actually support and enthusiastically aid a genocide.

[-] zeejoo@thelemmy.club 1 points 3 weeks ago

Good thing he wasn't on the ballot then

[-] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone -1 points 3 weeks ago

Good thing the candidate that was on the ballot wasn’t associated with him or his administration in any way and also vigorously denounced genocide at every opportunity! Right? … right??

[-] LostCarcosan@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago

Right, Harris sucked. So glad I didn't vote and Trump won instead. That has worked out so much better for Iran and the rest of the world, too. Could you imagine even trying to justify voting in the last election?!?!

[-] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone -1 points 3 weeks ago

Oops, that damn goalpost keeps moving around! Better tie it down!

[-] neatchee@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

the goal post has never moved from "try to leave the world better because of me or worse in spite of me, rather than better in spite of me or worse because of me"

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

More like supported and slightly reluctantly aided.

I expect there were guardrails that Israel was careful not to cross. You know, like completely flattening Gaza and demolishing southern Lebanon.

It's still AIPAC fueled genocide, but I definitely preferred the slower version to what we have now.

[-] Godric@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago
[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Needs to be updated to add the Iranian flag to the GOP track. Man, do I wish there were a realistic way to choose that bottom track!

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

it's simple, you just don't vote for the genocidal warmonger party, then if enough people do that you win

blowing up/ derailing the trolly also works

[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

And there's no viable way to do that under the current system, which is why the track isn't connected.

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

i love how you concede that the system is so dysfunctional you can't even oppose a genocide under it and simultaneously expect me to to believe that individuals voting (or not) is somehow making a meaningful difference in the outcome

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

it’s simple, you just don’t vote for the genocidal warmonger party, then if enough people do that you win

THAT'S NOT HOW VOTING WORKS!

People have to vote FOR the OTHER party, or else the genocidal warmonger party wins anyway!

You are saying shit that is both moronic and factually untrue.

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago

you know there's a non-genocidal warmonger party which could also be voted for.

I voted for them last election and don't regret it

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

you know there’s a non-genocidal warmonger party which could also be voted for.

No there fucking wasn't! Not one that could win! You're a goddamned liar and you are helping the fascists!

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago

there's no way anyone could help the fascists more than an 'opposition' party which routinely fails to actually oppose them

if the democrats had any principles and actually opposed fascism they wouldn't spend so much time punching left

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

there’s no way anyone could help the fascists more than an ‘opposition’ party which routinely fails to actually oppose them

Yes there is. By actively discouraging opposition to the fascists, which is what you're doing. You are literally delusional.

if the democrats had any principles and actually opposed fascism they wouldn’t spend so much time punching left

I'm not even saying you're wrong about the Democrats; I'm saying you're wrong about motherfucking GAME THEORY and MATH! Even acknowledging what you just wrote, YOU STILL HAVE TO VOTE FOR THEM ANYWAY!

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

i'm somewhat of a centrist so i think it's gotta be somewhere between these two:

[-] Godric@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Those are both encapsulated at the bottom of the meme!

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago

i mean not really, it's not out of moralism that i choose not to vote for genocidal warmonger red/blue, in fact the moralism is thinking voting for genocidaires is 'pragmatic'. not to mention continuing to votescold people over a year later lmao

organizing outside electoralism builds actual power. voting for slightly different managers of the same bloodthirsty war machine doesn't

[-] Godric@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

While organizing outside electoralism is great, electoralism is still the primary way power is apportioned in this country. Abandoning electoralism is ceding power to people who will use it for evil.

The stakes are the future of the world.

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago

if the 'future of the world' hinges on genociding an expendible out-group and the system is powerless to change that, then i choose to walk away from omelas

[-] MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 weeks ago

Congratulations on standing by your principles instead of by your morals.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Voting for neither is the same as voting for both.

[-] Diva@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago

Voting for neither is the same as voting for both.

if voting for neither is the same voting for both, then can we formally acknowledge that my vote makes zero difference and maybe people can stop votescolding?

[-] starik@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago

No, because voting for one is not the same as voting for neither/both.

Voting for the perfect candidate > voting for A > not voting > voting for B

The perfect candidate didn’t exist, but instead of choosing the second best option, you chose the third best option, and we ended up with the worst option because a lot of people did what you did. Thanks a bunch.

[-] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de -2 points 3 weeks ago

It must be so nice having worldviews that can be fully encapsulated by trolley memes

[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago

Well first you gotta gimme an example of one that wouldn’t fit.

[-] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I guess the view that I want to articulate could be represented as a trolley meme with the following changes:

  1. The lever has only some unknown probability of steering the trolley's path
  2. Millions of other people also influence the lever to degrees which are unknown
  3. The track splits into at least 10 different paths instead of two
  4. There are more splits off of each subsequent path
  5. Each path also produces benefits to some actors (not sure how we'd represent that)

If I try to simplify these changes, though, then maybe I could depict my view a bit like this?

But hey, that's just theory...

GAME THEORY

[-] Godric@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Either way, you gotta have your hand on the lever!

[-] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, despite my sassiness towards you in this thread this is a true and wise observation that goes ignored too often. My disagreements are not pertaining to the idea of inaction constituting action

[-] wpb@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago

So, actually that question though? Genocide used to be a really, really bad thing, and here you're making light of it. I feel like people have lost the plot a bit if they talk about an actual genocide like this. "Yeah, sure they committed a bit of genocide, but have you seen the other guy?" I feel like I'm losing my mind

[-] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

The only ones making light of genocide are the ones who helped make more of it happen through their refusal to vote for harm reduction.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, genocide is bad. You know what's worse? MORE genocide. That's what we got from people not voting because of it.

[-] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip -2 points 3 weeks ago

If you market yourself as being against fascism, maybe don't vehemently support a different fascist regime and shout down anyone who questions it.

The fact that people like you are spending your energy getting pissy with the voters and not the fucking Democratic party who refused to change their stance is fucking insane.

[-] neatchee@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago

surprise: I can hold two thoughts in my head at once

[-] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip -2 points 3 weeks ago

Thoughts, sure. You've chosen to spend your time attacking those who wanted change, not the ones who refused to not back the systemic murder of an entire people.

Priorities.

[-] neatchee@piefed.social 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't realize I'm a different person.

The two thoughts I hold are "on election day, it's self-gratifying not to vote for the outcome with the highest lows, raising the floor" and "before and after election day, do whatever you can to make the lives of politicians who fail miserable and support better candidates, up to and including civil unrest"

Not voting is categorically ineffective. There may be plenty of things more effective than voting, but not voting isn't one of them.

People love to present this scenario like it's a lever with three positions: candidate A, candidate B, or civil unrest. But it's not. It's one switch with two buttons (candidate a, candidate b) and another separate button for civil unrest. You can do both

[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 weeks ago

We have had years of constant video footage of it happening. Being desensitized is bound to happen.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

I don't know what kind of person could look at parents being handed the remains of their child in plastic baggies and at any point in their life go "oh wow are they still going on about the genocide?"

[-] athatet@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

That isn’t what they were saying tho.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

No, no one is saying those words exactly. But I see the sentiment be expressed in threads like this over and over, and it just doesn't compute.

this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2026
41 points (91.8% liked)

Political Memes

11861 readers
790 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