129
Trump got rid of veteran benefits and cut food boxes for seniors. (discuss.online)
submitted 1 week ago by bytesonbike@discuss.online to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ddplf@szmer.info 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sure, everyone hates oligarchs. But oligarchs are up there and out of reach, and they are strong enough to retaliate. Instead, you also got these minorities, they're right here in the punching distance and they even may not hit you back.

This is it, this is how the billionaires make Joes fight other Joes and not the rich. This is why we have the cultural war and not the class war.

[-] swemg@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

A real general strike could work

[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 1 points 1 week ago

*would definitely

There, much better :)

[-] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

Only until the technology exists to replace workers with AI and physical robots.

[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 1 points 1 week ago

Not that it really matters but replacing humans with machines has been done for all of the industrialized age on some level or another.

Therefore one doesnt need to worry about that. We rather need to take back the products of our labour. And later, we must demand equal distribution of wealth if work ever became obsolete, which isnt gonna happen imo.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Not going to happen in this lifetime.

[-] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

AI didn't exist in any commercial capacity three years ago. It's already displacing jobs and capturing hundreds of billions of dollars and the quality and ability has improved exponentially.

I do think we're going to see it this lifetime and sooner than we think. 10-15 years from now, it's really gonna suck being a kid looking for your first summer job.

[-] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

A united public could easily oust the oligarchs and put them where they belong (the guillotines). But that requires large-scale public co-operation and putting aside differences, something the American public is wholly incapable of. I don't think it would be that hard if that was required in Europe.

[-] NABDad@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Even in Europe when things would get bad enough for the people to put aside their differences and kill the ruling class, the differences tend to re-assert themselves once the common enemy is gone. That's where things go south. Cutting heads off is like eating potato chips. You can't just stop once you've started. Eventually you're pulling crumbs out of the bottom of the bag.

If it gets bad enough for the American people to unite to kill the oppressors, the oppressors will definitely have a bad time, but you better be ready for one hell of a rough ride after.

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

which is worse, the oligarchy (french monarchy) or the aftermath - robespierre / reign of terror etc?

I'd say france, after, even with the horrors of the transition is worth it.

we killed and forced our british royal oppressors once. so... perhaps... but it's awfully hard to rebuild things once wrecked.

[-] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago

Honestly, there is going to be a rough ride either way. Might as well make it useful.

[-] ddplf@szmer.info 1 points 1 week ago

We do have oligarchs in Europe, they're just not celebrities like their American counterparts. And very few of them are the actual billionaires.

That being said, they seem to keep low profile, maybe they really did learn the hard lesson from the European history.

[-] youCanCallMeDragon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

We’re not incapable, it’s just been thoroughly trained out of us. My dog doesn’t bite but he still has teeth.

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 3 points 1 week ago

This supports my hypothesis that people are mostly emotional. They're angry and scared so they lash out. They're not thinking in a calm detached manner.

Somehow we need to direct all the negative emotions towards the people who actually deserve it

[-] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's mainly an issue in the US. And Americans are not taught how to handle emotions or think critically.

[-] OfCourseNot@fedia.io 3 points 1 week ago

What is exactly an American issue? Because all the issues here are not exclusive to the US, they're pervasive all over Europe, and as far as I know (second hand), the rest of the world as well.

[-] conicalscientist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Post-national wealth is the thing they're distracting us from. They're more powerful than countries. They've basically bought the worlds superpowers. The axis of power is not nations anymore but collectives of oligarchs. As it stands it's apparently the Russia, China, and America regions with billionaires toying the world like a board game.

[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 1 points 1 week ago

In fact, not people actually deserve it. We live in a perverted system that needs inequality. We need to direct our power against said system.

It has been done successfully countless times in history. Just start reading non capitalist sources and be prepared to cry a lot.

If we all do it, there will be no capitalist states left to destroy better solutions.

[-] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

They're cucks. They want daddy dump to bend them over

[-] burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Oh, it's a different Dana White

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Oooh ok, I was surprised and confused for a second.

[-] Gorilladrums@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

I get his point and I agree with it, but I think it's worth pointing out that people can and often do care about multiple things at once

[-] plyth@feddit.org -4 points 1 week ago

This can be turned around. The planet is burning and you want to fuck around and argue pronouns.

How should unity be created? By tolerating everything or by surpressing everything in public?

Both are possible. How should the choice be made which one to use?

[-] SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 week ago

Intolerance is not to be tolerated.

[-] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

There's tiger that want to eat you and you want to negotiate a peace treaty with the tiger. 🤣

[-] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago

You ignore your own power. It's two tigers who have to cooperate to escape a burning cage.

[-] toomanypancakes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Nobody wants to argue about fucking pronouns except the people insisting on making it into a fucking issue. Nobody wants to argue it's okay to fuck who they want except the fuckheads saying you can't fuck who you want because I disagree.

This is a beyond garbage take.

[-] plyth@feddit.org -2 points 1 week ago

except the people insisting on making it into a fucking issue

Which are enough that society is split and there is no unity to prevent the planet from burning.

It's one way to call them stupid and wait until they change their mind. I think it's better to recognize that they insist on their way with the same determination. So instead of waiting forever, we should find a way to overcome the split.

[-] felsiq@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

find a way to overcome the split

Good idea, I propose everybody grows the fuck up and accepts people can be different than they are without being evil. If regressives can’t tolerate the existence of LQBTQ+ comrades, the only two morally acceptable choices I see are for them to get their shit together or for the rest of the world to move on without them. I’d LOVE to see a full working class coalition, but keep in mind these aren’t differences of opinion over tax policies we’re talking here - there’s no room for compromise if the stakes are human rights.

[-] erin@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago

People like you came up with the Missouri Compromise.

[-] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago

Only that I argue that we should choose one side or the other entirely.

[-] CXORA@aussie.zone 0 points 1 week ago

You're so right. We need to find a middle ground on every issue.

Vaccines cause autism is valid. Child brides are valid. Slavery is valid.

[-] plyth@feddit.org -2 points 1 week ago

I am not arguing for a middle ground but for choosing one side and fully committing to it.

[-] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

How should the choice be made which one to use?

Use tolerance as a social contract instead of a default "everyone is tolerated" type. If you don't tolerate someone else in society then you are no longer tolerated. Seems simple to me.

Now you might say, but the people that want to be called a certain pronoun aren't tolerating the hatred of another group that wants to address them "however they see fit". Well that 2nd group isn't tolerating the first group. The first group was just living and the second group started the intolerance. Also, if you use hatred to justify why you should be tolerated then you lost the fight.

Hope that clears it up for you.

[-] plyth@feddit.org -1 points 1 week ago

If you don’t tolerate someone else in society then you are no longer tolerated.

You can only do that if you control society. If you don't then intolerance towards nonnormative behavior becomes also a possible strategy.

this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025
129 points (98.5% liked)

Microblog Memes

8343 readers
519 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ReadyUser31@lemmy.world
aeronmelon@lemmy.world
needanke@feddit.org