this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2025
583 points (96.9% liked)

Showerthoughts

36932 readers
1162 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] vin@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Gandhi had trouble convincing the British to even consider independence until widespread communal violence swept the nation in the aftermath of WWII. What are you talking about?

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Gandhi was the peaceful alternative that gave Britain a place at the table.

[–] vin@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Where do you get that from? All the violent resistance like Subhash Chandra Bose and revolutionary movement were not big enough to be a major concern. Civil disobedience was more concerning given how widespread it was.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Civil Disobedience was the peaceful alternative; it is a show of force that only works if it carries the implication of a more violent alternative. Nobody ever won their freedom by appealing to the morality of the oppressor.

[–] vin@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Nope, nope, nope. It is not a show of force, it's making the society ungovernable, like not paying taxes, growing/making/selling anything to anyone etc. There was no implication of anything more violent. It is not appealing to the morality of the oppressor.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 3 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

If that was true, the British would have had their puppets shoot and starve them until they were governable.