this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2025
433 points (96.2% liked)
Political Memes
9584 readers
1802 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes 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 misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem folks ignore, is that Liberals gave Nazis power.
The reason we hate modern Neoliberals is precisely because they historically are the firsts to give maniacs power.
Now, how are your deathcamps going?
— 🏴️🅰️
The ceremonial handing over of the gun:
You mean Democracy? Yeah it can be upsetting when one of the candidates gets more votes than another. Here's a helpful website for more information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_United_States
Not arguing that Liberals do not give the gun to facists. Merely saying why they gave the gun to the fascists. Conveniently ignoring all the events that lead to them being willing to give the gun to the fascists.
When given the choice of what to do with the gun, Liberals will give it to the fascists. When they talk of liberty, they mean their liberty to give power to those that would take your liberty.
Edit: So at the end of all this, OP professes to suddenly not understand what a metaphor is.
And
No joke, that's the entirity of that comment. That where OPs position is headed.
You mean the vote totals?
Weren't Liberals in power before the vote started? 4 years or so right? They had 4 years to decide what to do with the gun in their hands, they chose to give it to the fascists. Conveniently ignored that.
Once again, you're not saying Liberals, when given the choice, don't give the gun to the fascist.
Here's my claim: when Liberals are given the choice between giving power to the left or giving power to facists, or even shooting fascists. They choose to give power to the fascists. For evidence I presented an example from recent history. There's a famous historical example. But here's an example of it about to happen in the future
You have my claim, you have examples of it happening in the real world past, present and future. What specifically is your problem with it?
My specific problem with it, is that that's how the government is designed to transfer power peacefully. It's worked very well for a couple hundred years so far and beats dictators for life by a country mile, as we say in this country.
You're suggesting the "Liberals in power" should refuse to hand over power at the appointed time because the victorious party is fascist. I think you're probably not following that through to it's logical conclusions. One of which is the end of our Democratic system of government. Another of which is the replacement of fascism with a different kind of fascism.
Anyone who wants to talk about how simple it is to just not let the elected party have power as agreed upon on in the founding documents has never worked to organize anything more complex than a bake sale.
Designed by whom? Regardless, assuming it was handed down by God, Liberals did nothing to change the design that willingly hands over power to Fascists, let alone ally with Leftifts against the rise of Fascism. (see: reality). Nor did they not hand the proverbial gun to the Fascists (see: meme)
No that's what you believe I'm suggesting because you won't listen to leftists.
They're suggesting that Liberalism necessarily creates the environment from which Fascism rises (see: examples past, present, future). Then when Fascism rises they willingly hand over the power saying "well that's how we set the system up."
Once again, you believe leftist ideas are simple. Perhaps so you can dismiss them by
It's this dismissiveness you refuse to even listen to leftists. You refuse to ally with Leftifts. But what you do do? Justify why the Fascists should have the gun.
Liberals, when holding the gun, give it to the Fascists, worse they believe Fascists should have the gun (see: you). That's true isn't it? The first step to solving a problem is identifying it.
Is this a trick question?
What?
Okay I'm almost positive that's not what it actually says.
HA. You mean the leftists that spent four months railing against Harris and all the reasons they wouldn't support her despite literal fascism being the end result of such a childish and futile response that just happened to 100% correlate to what russian disinformation wanted? We didn't ally with those Leftists? Yeah that's true I guess. But then they weren't doing the one single, tangible, productive thing they could have done to help stop "the rise of Fascism". So - why not ask them.
So you're saying the strawman argument was a given. How could those dirty libcucks have enabled fascism and then handed control over to it (them? whatever).
As presented, yeah. They are. "Don't enable fascism" Cool, lemme put it up on the fridge where we can all see it.
Listen to what. Listen to them tell me I enabled fascism and then turned over power to them? True. I'm not listening that garbage. If they have something of interest they want to say, nothing stopping them. Theoretically.
You have that precisely backwards. I voted to stop trump, they did not. And look into the crystal ball and tell me what you see next November. What do you see there? Do you see "liberals" not "allying" with "Leftists"? Or do you see leftists once again feigning dismay and contempt at the Democratic candidates and swearing never to support them despite the result being double extra super fascism? Want to bet some capital on that?
You're saying we should have destroyed the government while we had control of it. Cool. Noted. These are great leftist ideas, it's strange they're not more popular.
What flavor of leftist are you supposed to be?
Still can't admit that Liberals will give the gun to the Fascist.
When pushed you not only told me why they gave the gun to the Fascists, but that they should give the gun to the Fascists.
The rest is distraction from those two key points, that you not only do not disagree with the meme, but embody it. The first step to solving a problem is identifying it. In the last comment you identified the problem as Leftists, again embodying the meme.
Just let it go.
Optional@lemmy.worldis unwilling to reflect, and is exemplifying classic digressive responses.Until the first ICE facility has been dismantled, there’s nothing more to engage in.
My dumbass replied to the wrong thread, see the other one. I copy-pasted my comment to where it should have been.
bruv lol, I’ve been complementing our arguments this entire 🧵, I’m a comrade here.
My bad, I replied to the wrong comment I'll fix. Want me to delete?
whatever u want m8🤝😆
edit: I'm just dumb
No lol. Do whatever you feel is right is what I’m saying.
The liberal you were “arguing” with is doubling down on empowering the Nazis, so we can sanctify him as a “Quisling.”
Does your client not show you who you're addressing?
Doesn't look like I've got through to them. That doesn't matter so much, it wasn't for them. Anyone reading after can see, after all is said and done, the best OP had was to pretend to not know what a metaphor is.
Pretty damning for their position, they won't see it, everyone else can.
It does show me usernames and if I could read it would be helpful. Truth is I never read usernames, gets me into trouble all the time. In any case I misclicked the comment, and didn't read the username either. Just laziness.
Still can’t admit your strawman argument is invalid.
When pushed, you refused to understand how governments work.
How can someone disagree with a meme and embody it? If you have a point to make, please - do.
Here’s chatgpt’s summary when I asked it to parse the sentence
Not a straw man. I presented a picture of Liberals giving Fascists the gun. You argued Biden should have done that. More inability to listen.
We’ll try again. Liberals handed fascists the gun. Should they have done so?
Keep fighting those Leftists.
ChatGPT sure is helpful.
Explains the ChatGPT dunnit.
Did they? Was it a big gun? Did they hand it to them with two hands, or was it like they took the gun out of the cardboard box they kept it in and put it on the table for the fascists to pick up? What were Liberals wearing? See if ChatGPT knows.
Apparently!
Is this you admitting you were wrong?
Is that why you've resorted to pretending not to know what a metaphor is? The problem with people acting the fool, is that they look like fools. That's fine if they're being silly, not if they want people to take their position seriously.
Interesting you understood what the metaphor was up until now. Or were you pretending to understand up until now? Given you have only just learned you didn't understand, would you like to read through the thread again and try listen to what was said? Perhaps you can use GPT to explain it to you.
I have no idea. Was there a point being argued?
The problem with playing the fool. Anyone can read me saying:
And
My point was clear and stated many times. You could have read that if you wanted.
For once something we agree on. Can we just leave it at that? A positive note of agreement between us? For my own part, I'm happily quoting this nonsense at the start of the thread. Here's the culmination of your position:
And
Well you must admit it was highly effective.
What was?
Exactly! And well played.
Again, what was?
What was the moment, do you think, that it went so wrong for you?
Was it the beginning when you were waxing lyrical about Liberalism being for freedom? Was it when you saw the reality of Liberals handing your freedom away to Fascists? Was it when you said that Liberals should hand your freedom away to fascists?
Notice that you can't blame Leftists, they never held the gun, and the Liberals wouldn't give it to them.
Something sparked this delirium: pretending not to know what a metaphor is, pretending to not know what happened. This couldn't have been where you thought the conversation was going to go. What was it, do you think?
You stole Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guantanamo Bay, South Korea, installed Saddam Hussein, Augusto Pinochet, Hugo Banzer, Mao Zedong, Benjamin Netanyahu, and continue to menance the planet, without taking look at how your empire has genocide indigenous folks “for a couple hundred years.” I say your faux republic is pretty darn shit, that you leave dictators to cause planetary damage and don’t own up to the horrors you unleash.
Who was it again who dropped two nukes to silence an archipelago in a pyrrhic conquest?
I didn't say perfect.
What country do you live in?
What's the difference between liberalism and anarchism? Referring to liberals that support a welfare state and market regulation, not anarcho-capitalists like the American Libertarian Party. Seems very similar to reformist statist anarchism.
Liberalism support a monopoly on violence, and capitalising the markets. This created the plutocracy that fascists are enjoying today, and continue to enjoy othering and creating the greatest class discrepancy our planet has witnessed.
Anarchism says no to rulers, no to hierarchies. Total horizontally of power and means. Everyone deserves guns, no cops, no politburo/политбюро. The “markets” would be owned by the workers, and what they produce goes to them completely. No corporate owners or C-suites to steal the means workers produce. Most produce waste would cease, since folks can legally recycle and reuse, instead of disposed of goods.
Anarchism is therefore incompatible with Liberalism, because Liberals demand monopolies, and Anarchists demand syndicates. One has a rule, the other a federation of rules.
Thanks for the explanation.
I don't think the proliferation of violence is a good thing. I think the most powerful entity having control of violence makes the most sense, as it reduces the amount of violence. That is, assuming that entity is sufficiently limited and democratic, but that of course is the foundation of liberalism.
I think most social democrats would be in favor of private co-ops, state owned industries, and recycling.
If factories/offices were owned by a co-op though, wtih no state, what incentive would they have to let you repair/recycle their product? Who would stop them from putting DRM in their product, and gluing everything together? Who would enforce right-to-repair laws?
This is incredibly naïve, because then the instigators of violence end up becoming the state itself. That's exactly how you get mobsters, warlords, and gestapos. Enough Watergates, and you get the last Edward Snowden, ever. How many more state sanctioned [qualified immune] violence do you need until the last indigenous person is democratically eradicated? (Counting here all Liberal Nations today that still instigate genocide against the indigenous, not just 🇺🇲)
The same ones their families and other syndicates would need. If we use the lumber, nails, glue, saws, screws, and sanders to make chairs (metaphor), every worker from their families needs chairs to work, live, and play musical chairs. The demand would produce its need. If they break, we repair, since chairs are necessary for an anarchy.
The same ones that prevent folks from drinking poison from a known snake oil dealer: demand of disassociation, and refusal to use poisoned goods.
If a chair breaks day one from a syndicate known to make bad chairs, do you go to the same syndicate to get a new longer lasting chair? The metaphor here would be a chair that doesn't chair without a lock and self-deterioration. Anarchists would just boycott that syndicate from making unchairs.
Flip this question, because the quo has always been your right to repair. Capitalists forbade you these rights you always had. Liberalism allowed patents, copyrights, EULAs, and regulations from even prohibiting you to reverse engineer and syndicate better products.
Anarchists hate the Liberals that allowed these monopolies to form. So why would anarchists rob you of your rights to look at how stuff works, and make better things?
Liberals hate that right, and desire only elites have that right, so they created the ones who have a right to repair it, and those that can manufacture the product, and you the user without the degree, certification, or license to do either of these things, lest you want a fine, jail time, or worse.
You mean the people who refused to prevent trump from taking power because "the system is rigged"? Because Harris "doesn't support the working class"? Who couldn't bring themselves to vote for such a flawed candidate that it's definitely the Democrats' fault that trump won?
Those fuckwits who gave the current nazis power?
Those aren't liberals. They're idiots.
Are you American? Did you vote Harris? I'm assuming no on both since they're "our" deathcamps. So let me tell you what's wrong with the politics in your country. They're unfair, unpopular, and lean fascist. You'll be under your own trump soon, if you're not already. Any questions.
Did you just “No you!” my entire post?
If you're a liberal, then liberate. Stop ~~voting~~urging for death.
I . . . don't know what that is. Maybe? I guess?
Okay. Uh - FLy! Be Free!
Stop urging for death? . . . I don't . . . what?
Is this how you respond to people in ICE facilities, Guantanamo, CECOT, and now Guyana?
If this is ignorance, I think you just summed for me liberals’ kurzgesagt. If it's rhetorical, then maybe you're not liberal at all.
Oh man, don’t even get me started on liberals’ kurzgesagt. Oh ho! Oh we’d be here all day!
Liberals and their kurzgesagt, amirite?
The liberals demonified by trump, however, are more like the party where many members put up resistance even in the face of violence - the SPD. American version of "liberal", aka anything left of american center.
But yea neolibs will vote for anything if it makes them money in the short term.