this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2025
396 points (92.9% liked)
Lefty Memes
6410 readers
1217 users here now
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Serious posts, news, discussion and agitprop/stuff that's better fit for a poster than a meme go in c/Socialism.
If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.
Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low quality!
Rules
0. Only post socialist memes
That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme. Please post agitprop here)
0.5 [Provisional Rule] Use alt text or image descriptions to allow greater accessibility
(Please take a look at our wiki page for the guidelines on how to actually write alternative text!)
We require alternative text (from now referred to as "alt text") to be added to all posts/comments containing media, such as images, animated GIFs, videos, audio files, and custom emojis.
EDIT: For files you share in the comments, a simple summary should be enough if they’re too complex.
We are committed to social equity and to reducing barriers of entry, including (digital) communication and culture. It takes each of us only a few moments to make a whole world of content (more) accessible to a bunch of folks.
When alt text is absent, a reminder will be issued. If you don't add the missing alt text within 48 hours, the post will be removed. No hard feelings.
0.5.1 Style tip about abbreviations and short forms
When writing stuff like "lol" and "iirc", it's a good idea to try and replace those with their all caps counterpart
- ofc => OFC
- af = AF
- ok => OK
- lol => LOL
- bc => BC
- bs => BS
- iirc => IIRC
- cia => CIA
- nato => Nato (you don't spell it when talking, right?)
- usa => USA
- prc => PRC
- etc.
Why? Because otherwise (AFAIK), screen readers will try to read them out as actually words instead of spelling them
1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here
Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.
2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.
3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.
That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).
4. No Bigotry.
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.
(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)
6. Don't irrationally idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.
- Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:
- Racism
- Sexism
- Queerphobia
- Ableism
- Classism
- Rape or assault
- Genocide/ethnic cleansing or (mass) deportations
- Fascism
- (National) chauvinism
- Orientalism
- Colonialism or Imperialism (and their neo- counterparts)
- Zionism
- Religious fundamentalism of any kind
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
Disclaimer: I don't necessarily think you hold any of the following beliefs, but strongly believe that "free speech" is not something anyone should side with the right on, regardless of reason.
The thing about free speech absolutism is that no one actually believes it, they just draw the line in different places. You still will be unable to share recipes for homemade explosives, make credible threats, or leak state secrets. Society draws the line of free speech where harm prevention is more valuable than freedom. Why should all speech, even harmful speech, be protected? What principle makes that ideal sacred, other than that it was written into the US constitution?
Some speech is already deemed too harmful to society. We simply draw the line before the harm reaches the ruling class, and after the most vulnerable are harmed. How many more mass shooters influenced by online echo chambers of hatred and vitriol must we suffer? The right does not believe in true free speech. They believe that their speech that is harmful to the vulnerable must be protected, while speech that threatens the status quo must be punished.
Like calling for the executions of legislators telling military personnel to follow the law. Or designating antifascists as terrorists. Or stopping science reporting on global warming. Or preventing teachers from accurately teaching about gender and sexuality.
But the fascists calling for a white ethnostate and the end of human rights for multiple vulnerable populations, that speech must be protected.
Obviously, the government policing speech is dangerous, because those in power may choose to abuse that power. We're seeing it now, with countless first amendment violations by the Trump administration, or things like Palestinian Action arrests in the UK. I do not think the US government, or most governments, are in a position to be trusted with speech restrictions. However, the "free speech" movement in the right does not actually care about the specifics of whether the government or private citizens restrict speech. The specifics of the first amendment don't matter, because it's all a dog whistle for other bigots. They clearly do want to control speech, as evidenced by the current administration in the US, or the response to the Kirk shooting, or the removal of qualified professionals from their positions for doing their job correctly, or the calls to silence accurate reporting and remove broadcasting licenses, and I could go on.
We do not, under any circumstances, "gotta give it to them." The right does not care about free speech. They care about protecting the in-group while restricting the out-group. Free speech has always been a myth, and instead of trying to protect it as some sacred ideal, we should shift the line to protect the vulnerable instead of the powerful.
So first of all, congrats on proper disclaimer at the beggining - I tried to distance myself during reading thanks to that and I believe it helped me better grasp what you're saying.
I do get your point, but honestly the only part that is speaking to me is the one about protecting the vulnerable, because what the right does in the US is, absolutely, not free speech in any way or form - they are practicing censorship and it's painfully obvious. I am actually from Europe so the right vs left is not really that much on my mind in case of these topics - I simply abhor the idea of limiting by law what can be said or forcing what is to be said ( Gulf of America? .-. ). I do not argue for "free speech" as is proclaimed by the US right wing, but for absolute free speech - both in the terms of being free to say whatever and in being free to be judged by the public for whats left one's mouth.
But, while I do not exactly agree with your points, I do agree that it's worthwhile to consider defending vurnerable folk. Although in perfect scenario, communities would do so organically. :/
I always find disclaimers to be helpful to avoid making people feel attacked. As a citizen in a country where my rights are constantly under attack, often with "free speech" being part of the rationale, this issue hits close to home. Thanks for engaging in good faith, and for your point of view. I also agree that ideally, communities would be able to self-regulate without state control over speech, but do believe that in the short term better protections are necessary until societal change can happen. Any protections implemented would require broad support, and be very limited in scope. For example, saying, "I don't like trans people," should never be illegal, but something like, "we should kill all those [insert relevant slur]," or other such speech directly inciting hate crimes might be worth regulating, even if just to add an enhanced charge to related crimes. Again, thanks for engaging in good faith, and for your insight!