this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
728 points (86.7% liked)

Flippanarchy

1183 readers
145 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.

  7. No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de -5 points 2 days ago (118 children)

Guys guys, lets work for the slow death instead of the fast death

i mean... yes?

[–] Chookitypok@piefed.social 28 points 2 days ago (32 children)

What about working for the no death ?

[–] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 2 days ago (24 children)

we all are working for it but clearly aren't there yet, to draw a parallel, we don't have a cure for cancer YET but you can bet your ass i'm gonna do chemo if i end up with it

[–] Chookitypok@piefed.social -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

To reuse the analogy, I'm not saying that everyone becoming immortal will happen in a finger snap, I'm saying that "just dying from cancer Vs. chemo for a few wealthy" is a bullshit choice. The first wee basic step we should strive for is to make the treatment available to all those suffering from cancer.

[–] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

The wee basic step we should strive for is to make the treatment available to all those suffering from cancer.

right. so the slow death. the one you were previously criticizing.

In politics, the first wee basic step we should strive for is not a complete revolution without the support of the masses, but to put in power someone who, if not better, doesn't ruin more the already tragic and delicate system we have, to give us time to organize better.

And uhh yeah we kinda failed at that

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

without the support of the masses

Good thing clinton and harris had all that support of the masses, love how they managed to get all that support from the masses. Im glad me not voting for them didn't matter, because 'the masses' supported them so much!

[–] Chookitypok@piefed.social 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Said it already, the slow death is accepting that the treatment should go to those who can afford it. That's the unacceptable compromise for leftists...

Offer arrives from global council of oligarchs tomorrow:

Kill all landlords, landback by the end of the month, cops are allowed only two pieces of kit¹, but we keep gig apps cops and for-profit healthcare for at least another decade. No struggle no tear gas no death.

I'd take that deal.

¹pants bullets radio and a car each count for one.

[–] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de -3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the slow death is accepting that the treatment should go to those who can afford it.

and how does that relate to politics, especially seeing as you are actively sabotaging the party that wants medicare/medicaid

[–] Corn@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The party doesn't want medicare4all, hence why they didnt pass it when they had the power to, or use some of the executive's powers to get as much non-means tested heathcare to the people as possible.

[–] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

since you all seem to get your one-liner responses from the same text file, i'm gonna follow your example and repost another comment from this post

Democrats haven't had 60 senators since 1979. They had 58 in 2010 for exactly 72 days and tried to pass public option healthcare but only 1 independent voted with them so they settled for the lesser medicaid expansion that the current Republicans are gutting in the budget. For the record, that medicaid expansion passed with supermajority as every singe Republican voted nay.

[–] Corn@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You only need a simple majority to remove the filibuster. We elected them to use their power, not to let their hands be tied by rules that never seem to stop them or the republicans from doing bad things.

[–] isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

what's that to do with medicare?

[–] Corn@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago

Dems could have simply gotten rid of the filibuster and passed free healthcare with 50 votes, and shown an entire generation of voters that politics is a viable means of achieving positive social change. But they genuinely do not want this because the donor class does not want this, so they let the rules stop them.

For the dems, a generation of energized, politically active 20-30 year olds is a problem to overcome.

load more comments (22 replies)
load more comments (29 replies)
load more comments (114 replies)