this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
371 points (96.0% liked)
memes
19213 readers
1293 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
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 whole idea that discussing politics is lame is a neoliberal brainworm.
Don't discuss politics with your family, just enjoy the time! — okay weird but sure
Don't talk politics with your friends — what the hell why not
No politics at work — that's a deeply political place wtf are we doing
When people say no politics, that means no arguing. This applies to office politics, family politics, and of course government politics.
The no arguing thing is key. Everyone eventually finds a topic that they don't agree on, because politics, in the greek philosophy (aristotle based) sense of the word (I actually loved nicomachean ethics), is about the pursuit of the good life writ large. The chances of two people believing in the exact same life goals is almost zero, so there will be a fundamental disagreement at some point that, because we are talking about using governmental authority as a cudgel (in the modern sense of the word politics) to bring about a 'good life' for society, will cause a lot of friction.
In environments where we can't control who we interact with, and that are semi-public with an 'audience,' such as work and family dinners, it's just easier to say no politics and focus on the agreed areas of shared interests. Otherwise those little frictions can build into socially driven, highly charged arguments.
Keep political discussions to where everyone can easily walk away, where it's one-on-one, or where everybody comes wanting to talk politics, and things are fine.
which ends up just meaning the racist uncle gets to shout his opinion and don't you dare tell him he is wrong.
Fuck him, let him be wrong. In the Midwest we just ignore that person and they end up passed out on the couch by 5pm.
let us be right instead, then.
part of the problem is because talking solution politics = annoying please stop, but racist/fascist rant = hes like this just let him be.
i can trace some parallels with our current conundrum.
The only place to discuss politics is the same place we're supposed to talk about gun violence.
A concrete, soundproof bunker that you need to climb a 60-foot ladder down to seal yourself inside, ensure nobody is around, and whisper your grievances into a small vinyl bag, then tie the bag up with a zip-tie and place it inside a mason jar and return it to the shelf inside the bunker.
This is how you protest as an American if you want to follow established societal norms and etiquette. Anything else and it's between 4 and 10 gunshots to the chest, face and back.
no way im going to talk politics at work, i have work to do.
Don't yell about politics in the work place. Just complaining about straw men is tiring.
sure, let's just finish our grueling shift during repression by the gestapo in silence.
nothing to see here, i don't wanna upset the colleagues with such nonsense like "politics"
Yelling and talking are different things. Don't get into a fit is all.
i find some yellers to be justified in their anger and break from polite decorum.
There are virtually no current events in Germany and yelling about Americans being cray cray is not constructive or beneficial to our mental health. They are not our countrymen.
which means you can ignore all the real consequences of their global campaign?
would the rest of the world be wise if they ignored european fascism the last time around?
No. Of course not. You jump to extremes. That's not very cash money. But it does mean that we shouldn't base our belief in the rule of law on the American system. Foreigners are doing foreigner things all the time. You might not like it but you gotta accept that from time to time. Attention is limited and should be spent wisely.
the extremes are literally happening irl tho
Literally not what I said.
Jumping to extremes is an argumentative tactic that attacks the argument in a non factual way.
U don't discuss politics at work cos it's a politically unwise move that will alienate about 50% of people. That's the only one that makes sence
Here's the caveat.
You CAN talk to your peers and people you work with who don't outrank you or can get you fired. In fact, this is important. You just have to know how to toe the line and not come off as some kind of radical who will push people away.
Most people I work with are DYING to express something or rant or rave about how unfair or frightening this current immigration thing is, but are afraid to broach the topic. If you just know how to ask questions and listen people will open up to you.
You don't DECLARE your politics on a Zoom call with your mid-level manager, you ASK people how they're doing in one-on-one calls or while having lunch together, and while people are feeling friendly or vulnerable and you give them support whatever they say, while explaining your feelings even if they run counter to theirs. You can turn people this way, but more often than not you will find allies.
It IS risky, I wouldn't promote it, I'm just saying it's not quite as hot-firepoker of an issue as many people think. (Your results may vary depending on your industry, state you work in, and skin color.)
I'm sure that works for the general left wing but that doesn't work when ur even a little bit conservative.
You see conservatives are infinitely more tolerant of opinions they disagree with than the left is. I support deportations of illegal immigrants their is no way u can possibly say that without getting called a Nazi or fascist by a decent percent of the population who will go to extreme measures to fuck it life up.
Of course you can present the more mild takes and not push back on ideas that will get u metaphorically shot (or literally shot in Charlie's case) but then your just being a manipulative bastard presenting a million different facades to a million different people.
85% of Americans support deportation of illegal immigrants charged with a violent crime. And 55% support deportation of all illegal immigrants. Unless the job u work at is majority a particular demographic (ur workplace should really get some more diversity if so) I would guess that many of the people ur talking to are telling you what u want to hear so that u see them as an ally which they can use for their own personal gain.
I have no idea where you pulled those figures, but even if they're from a legit source, that's not an indicator of anything meaningful. There were similar rates and ratios about segregation in the US before the Civil Rights movement. It was a "known fact" that our cultures would never mesh, and people broadly supported keeping races separated by force if necessary.
But you know what we did as a country anyway? The people advocating for human rights won, we used the military to not enforce segregation but integration, and it made a lot of people VERY mad, which we're still feeling the effects of today. But the outcome is that we don't blink when we pass an interracial couple in most of the US. We have a long ways to go, but the disaster everyone was worried about was exposed to be a lie and it turns out black people are fine to mix with white people. We even use the same pools and water fountains and nobody was harmed.
The problem with all of these issues is that too many people bend to the discomfort of the minority too readily. No pushback. Everyone is so scared of change that they cling to outmoded ways of thought and rationalizations for keeping "the wrong people" out of their space, but the MOMENT you change our national leadership and policy, people adapt.
People adapt to your rule, that's why we need to enforce systems to elect the best possible rulers, because good or bad they set the tone.
Those figures you cited could be radically swung in different directions if you ask them the question differently, or say "What about your neighbor Garcia who works at the gas station, he has four kids but no papers, do you want to deport him too?" And most people who have this kind of connection to someone will go "Well..."
Our species isn't hard-set in its values, we can change everything overnight if we worked harder together to reduce the fear and insecurity and use better emotional narratives to remind people that we're all humans and we have plenty of physical and emotional resources to integrate people into our population. We've done it before, we just need better follow-through and harsher punishments against those trying to dehumanize others.
The opinion of the majority of Americans doesn't mean anything huh? Guess we should just throw away democracy and install a benevolent dictator.
"And nobody was harmed" that's complete bullshit. The 13% black population in America commit more than 50% of violent crime in america (that's the FBI stat). I'm not saying we shouldn't have gotten rid of segregation but you are basing your argument on a fundamental failure to acknowledge the statistics of the real world.
"Enforce systems to elect the best possible rulers" how does this work? Do some people get less vote? Do some people get more? That's literally fascism. Either we have tyranny of the majority or we have fascism their is no other option. Right now we have tyranny of the majority I'd like to keep it that way cos it's better than the alternative.
Fuck emotional narratives. Suicidal empathy will be the death of society. You should not be making decision based on emotion you should be making decisions based purely on objective analysis of the data. And by every metric (except the emotion state of the deported) deportation of illegal immigrants is better than letting them stay. Economy better, Crime better, house market better, job market better. Etc. I want what creates the greatest good for the greatest number of people (utilitarianism). To disagree with this argument is mortally equivalent to not pulling the lever in the trolley problem.
How do u make integration happen? Do you force people? Who integrates into who? Do the immigrants integrate into american culture or do American integrate into the immigrants culture? Or do we all meet happily at the end of time right in the middle? Cos we both knows that's an appeal to an impossible fantasy. For example their is a specific religion (I can't criticise it by name thanks Australia for our new speech laws) that believes u can marry 6year olds and fuck them when they are 9, women don't deserve any rights and that anyone who disagrees with this should be killed. How the hell do u plan to integrate that into American culture? By force? Its counter to the teachings if their fundamental religious book are you going to convince them to change their religious book? Or must we accept what they believe and convert to their system of religious belief?
Maybe fifty percent need to be alienated.
So you get fired but at least you can be proud while unemployed?
I’d rather work a job where people don’t support mothers being shot in the face or people carrying legal and holstered weapons don’t get shot ten times in the back after being disarmed.
That's easy enough to say on the internet, but your recent incendiary hyperbole aside, hard to do IRL.
That’s the problem it’s way more than zero percent of the population.
I don't disagree with that statement but it's barely relevant to the sub-topic we're on here.
Well you just said the complete opposite.
Your fault for not specifying which "it" you were referring to. I don't re-read my own comments as a full-time job, and didn't on this occasion.
Again, seeing as even Trump doesn't “support mothers being shot in the face or people carrying legal and holstered weapons [getting] shot ten times in the back after being disarmed," I don't know who you're talking about when you preach against them. Again, presumably you're virtue-signaling.
The worst I've seen from MAGA are the ones who say it's unfortunate but generally victim-blame them for their actions; they'll say "Well, he may have been disarmed and therefore shouldn't have been shot, but he shouldn't have been there in the first place." I have yet to see a single person even on the anonymous pages of the internet saying their deaths were a good thing.
You just have to look and you’ll see people celebrating Pretti’s death while hating the second amendment.
I do look; I'm telling you I haven't seen it in all the places I've looked.
Politics means the dealings of the city. It means the people and their lives. We've been conditioned to immediately believe political is equal to electoralism, which is a lie.
Politics is unionizing, it's feeding your neighbors, it's organizing community gardens and sing alongs, it's starting a mutual aid network to ensure every need is met. It's all these and million more things.
The cranky unhappy politics wonk endlessly droning on about the evils of the world are a drain on everyone else’s joy.
This may be because I'm autistic, but I think apoliticals are the most boring people in the world. Apoliticals always want to talk about the weather and their favourite reality TV show and what they did while drinking on the weekend. But My political friends talk about political stuff like science fiction, history, cool movies, fun gossip.
Politics is what humans are best at in all the animal kingdom. If a human wants to be apolitical, well they're just not living up to their potential. I'd get just as much engaging conversation from a dog, and it would be cuter.
People like this are usually very timid and weak in emotional fortitude for talking about difficult topics, and have probably had too many arguments with people even less intelligent and it created trauma. To say nothing of the actual deliberate campaigns by many internal and external forces to poison the wells of dialogue so that everyone feels lost and afraid of politics.
I think along with the autistic spectrum comes an internal dialogue and information organization system that makes people care about more abstract concepts and ideas, which are inherently political if they involve more than one person, real or imaginary.
I don't mind politics wonks if they have moderation and aren't doomers.
Doomers or do-nothing liberals are the worst kind, I will take an outspoken conservative over liberals and doomers any day. At least an outspoken conservative chud I can talk to and understand and eventually break. Because I am smarter than most of them. So are you. We all are. We're just afraid of confrontation but you can shape conversations so that these people let their guard down and actually become receptive to new perspectives if you can change their feelings.