this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
1326 points (96.4% liked)

Political Memes

5222 readers
3101 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

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.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
1326
Dear America (sopuli.xyz)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Edited to replace original incorrect Herzog attribution with my own version that correctly attributes the quote

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

The .00001 left over is who is running the show

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

I guess I am in the murderous third. If I could Thanos snap the MAGA out of existence, I would not hesitate.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

People of Earth, you are waking up, as our advanced space-faring race once did...

-- Gul Dukat

Dukat 2024 -- Make Cardassia Great Again

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I kinda hate this framing because it makes it seem inevitable and ever-present. Even on the right it's more like 5% true hate, 28% normal Republican who does not find true hate disqualifying. There's plenty of reason to discredit that or disagree with it etc but it's not the same as being in the 5%.

I was just listening to an interview with an evangelical who was lesser-of-two-evils on Trump, he'll vote for Trump but he's not a True Believer.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

he’ll vote for Trump but he’s not a True Believer.

If you support fascists, you are a fascist. Period.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago

But if the 28% are still voting for the true hate, how does that not make them complicit in what the hateful government is doing? Knowingly voting for the hateful option puts the 28% in the same pen as the 5%.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

lol this doesn’t make yall seem any better

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think they're saying that it's something we can solve, not that we're good.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

I'm pretty sure the only thing that would solve this is re-education camps for all registered Republicans lol. Those people are divorced from reality. Even the never trumpers don't believe in climate change.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If it's magas vs Clinton libs I'll probably just watch happily

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Until the magas are done with the libs

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

Yeah, but hopefully they'll be softened up a bit

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

First they came for the Clinton libs and I said nothing for I was not a Clinton lib lol

JK they always come for the socialists first.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The Clinton libs would help them come for the socialists... If the magas could tell the difference between a lib and a progressive that is

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 week ago (4 children)

This has been reported for violating rule 2: "No misinformation", as the quote was misattributed.

The full rule:

Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

OP admitted they didn't double check the author of the quote. This means it was not intentional.

Leaving it up.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago

This sounds like if someone just said they didn't know it was bs, it's a get out of jail free card.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

See he should have attributed that quote to Julius Caesar, then it would be considered humor and not misinformation.

JFC just enjoy the meme.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Should I make a new rule that all quotes must be attributed to Oscar the Grouch? I will, either way.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

"All quotes must be attributed to Oscar the Grouch."

  • Oscar the Grouch
[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 week ago (4 children)

not a good reason to leave it up. Think about the precedent that sets.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Think about the precedent that pulling down discussions wholesale because some inconsequential detail about them is wrong sets.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

...the precedent that people are allowed to make minor mistakes? Gasp THE HORROR

Seriously, this mistake isn't a big deal, no intentional misdirection and in any case, the quote is more important for conversation than the actual author.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I think the objection here is that it creates a massive loophole: Intentionally post misinformation, claim you thought it was legitimate. Repeat until you stop getting the benefit of the doubt, start over with a new account, repeat ad infinitum.

I'm not sure what the best solution is, but I think we at least need some kind of very clear notice, on the feed page and not just in the comments, that the content is proven to be factually incorrect.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

If it's more serious misinformation, it probably warrants taking down the post, even if unintentional. The nuance would then be that genuine error doesn't immediatly warrant banning, even if the post is taken down.

This one is a mild and unintentional case with little implications either way. If someone were to cite this as "But this one you left up!" as excuse for a different, more severe case, the mods would justifiably say that it doesn't apply.

Besides, it's not like setting a precedent is as serious for community mods as it is for courts of law - mods can change the rules when a situation arises that warrants it and enforce them accordingly, make one-off decisions for special cases or admit a previous decision was a mistake and generally have more leeway.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think the point is it's factually incorrect about the least significant fact.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

This is a great point but man that was hard to process.

Maybe I'm running a little slow today?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago

It wasn't intentional, FFS. I hate this place so much.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

wait. You saw this comment, and reported it anyways?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'll just make a new one (this isn't oc) when I get home but that'll be 10h at least. It's OK to nuke this since it is sorta misinfo, although I didn't know it when I posted it

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nah. That would nuke all the back-and-forth found here. I'd rather keep the discussion up.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

I have a deep appreciate for this level of discernment. Moderating posts and their discussions in good-faith and abiding by the spirit/intention of the rules instead of strict enforcement by letter fosters community trust and makes it more difficult to argue against removals/bans when they do happen.

Thanks for volunteering and keeping the lights on.

load more comments
view more: next ›