For when you need a laugh!
The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!
But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.
Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.
Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines
Have fun!
Oldie but goodie.
Transcript: Tweet by the SRSLY wrong podcast. Content: "message to my enemies: when the revolution comes you're not just gonna get the wall, buddy, you're gonna get four walls, a roof, clean clothes, good food, education, and quality health care because that's what every human being alive deserves"
So, who's gonna decide who's gonna get shot? How will you avoid a Robbespierre situaion?
You are on the list now, get ready to get purged because of one comment in which you questioned the holy revolution /s
When will we anarchists learn? ;_; /j
Imagine posting such a meme (and claiming you support anarchism) but being (or acting) completely ignorant of the paradox of tolerance..
The reason we don't have human rights for all is because of people with a vested interest in oppressing others and the systems they maintain, and most will never willingly just give up their power (yes, including the power to be one up from the bottom but being able to punch down at immigrants).
Which is why there is zero room to tolerate bigotry and oppression, nor those who, given a chance to be better, still refuse.
Did you know there is an entire school of anarchism devoted to nonviolence?
I never claimed I was against self defense. I just refuse to accept the IDF's definition of the word.
Have you replied to the wrong person? If not, what the fuck does the IDF's definition of anything have to do with this conversation?
Sorry if that flew over your head. I still refuse your premise that I condone the violence of bigots if I don't support stalinist death squads.
Defending against asbigrt's violence is self-defense. Executions by death squads aren't.
Nothing flew over my head, you're just trying to muddy the waters.
I am the farthest thing from a Stalinist, and I am not in support of death squads.
What I am in support of, as I mentioned in my comment, and knew you would ignore, is giving them plenty of opportunity to stop being bigots (they get them every single day). But when they continue to refuse - meaning they are actively threatening the lives of marginalised people, I am no longer obligated to care for their safety nor tolerate their behaviours, which they openly declare they are willing to kill and die to preserve.
The fact that you and others here are more concerned for the hypothetical safety of the bigot in this thread than you are for the actual safety of the people they are an active and very real threat to, says it all really. You only support self defence on your terms, but you're not the one being threatened, so that's not how it works.
Yeah. That's self-defense. I never claimed I uas against self-defense (It's a meme, buddy).
Never said anything of the sort. Please stop twisting my words.
At the end of the day, it'll just be the people in charge of whatever band of rebels comes out on top, and whatever local faction of them ends up in power across the country as a result of that. That's all the founding fathers of the US were. We like to think of them as heroes, but they and their constituents were just the guys who got to choose who was a traitor and who wasn't. History painted the winners more colorfully than they were, as it always does.
I'm sure the birth of my country was a terrifying time for anyone who wasn't squarely proven to be aligned with the revolution, and the same will be true when people have had enough in modern times as well.
Yeah, reminds me of why I prefer anarchism, i.e. bottom-up decision making.