this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
510 points (92.4% liked)
196
6388 readers
1081 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And instead of asking yourself why Democratic politicians are failing to inspire loyalty you blame the voters of a democracy?
Hot take bud.
Democracy means you have the freedom to elect a fascist government if you want to, and that's exactly what the American people have done. They exercised their freedom to choose Trump over Harris.
American people don't get very many freedoms. They don't get the freedom to vote third party. They don't get the freedom to vote "neither of the above". They don't get the freedom to use the popular vote. But they do get the freedom to choose between the two big candidates, and that's the freedom they exercised.
You very much can vote for an alternative party in the United States. I have voted Green in several elections.
If that's all democracy is then it's benefits have been vastly overstated and I see no reason to protect it.
Okay, sure. You can let the fascists turn America into a monarchy and find out if a communist revolution is easier in a monarchy than a neoliberal capitalist democracy. That's clearly what you want to happen.
I don't think it is but people like you set yourself in opposition to any radical change so long as you live in the comfort of a neoliberal capitalist democracy. See the problem?
For example, I was in full favor of the rail strike back in 2022. Sure it's no revolution, but shutting down railways certainly would have been radical and led to some powerful concessions being made by oligarchs to American workers. And let me guess, you opposed the strike and supported Joe Biden, 44 Democratic senators and 36 Republican senators who decided to block it right?
So it's not me who's choosing revolution under monarchy instead of neoliberal capitalist democracy.
It's you.
Nah, you're way off. I was actually pretty furious with AOC for voting to force an end to the strike.
Your problem is, you see everyone else as an enemy, and assume all kinds of nonsense about them out of fear.
Hold on.
I haven't seen you say you were furious with Biden, Schumer or any Democratic Senators.
This is the first time you say you were furious with a Democratic politician and you choose AOC. Seems suspicious you call out a progressive of all people. Where's your fury at Biden or the 44 Democratic senators who voted to block the rail strike?
Comes off like you're happy to talk about being furious at a progressive because you don't care if people vote for her. But you want people to vote for strike blocking, genocide supporting trash like Biden so you conveniently never express your fury at him.
Prove me wrong. Talk about how furious you are at Biden for blocking the rail strike. Talk about how furious you are at Schumer for blocking the rail strike.
Are you five? Because you talk like a five year old who thinks throwing a tantrum works.
I mean the rest of us learned that it just makes things worse by eight years old. (Hint: things are much worse now)
Lol. Caught ya.
Why is that relevant? To the concentration camps and death squads we are dealing with today?
Do you understand cause and effect? I'm pointing out there were cracks in the supposed strategy to keep Trump out of office. Some of those cracks were instances where Joe Biden went against the sentiments of his own voters and sabotaged his own chances at reelection.
Why are you telling me, a voter this? What am I supposed to do with that information?
That information for for democrat electeds and their consultants.
Voters decide among the options presented. They don't decide how the campaigns are run. Are you suggesting I start a new political party?
You asked me a question and I answered. I don't know what else to tell you.
Because the other poster wasn't explicitly furious with Biden over rail workers or some nonsense.
They went out of their way to express they were furious at AOC for her part in blocking the rail strike but not Joe Biden, the president of the United States. You don't think that's odd?
Why would that be odd? We expect better of AOC. Biden blocking the strike was disappointing, of course, but not really unexpected for a corporate Dem.
That's not what I was calling out as odd. Let me demonstrate what's odd.
Demonstrate to me you are able to say: "I am furious with Joe Biden for blocking the rail strike."
Hard to get worked up of this when the competition is trying to enact a new halocaust and only failing due to incompetence.
The competition is back in power because Joe Biden sabotaged his own chances at re-election by making voters he was depending on furious with him.
What do you think voters should do about that?
Depends on what kind of voters they are.
If they stay home during the Democratic primaries they should show up to Democratic primaries to vote for a candidate who doesn't block strikes and doesn't support genocide.
If they show up to Democratic primaries and vote for a candidate who doesn't block strikes and doesn't support genocide they should keep doing that.
If they show up to the Democratic primaries and vote for candidates who block strikes and support genocide they should stop doing that and instead vote for a candidate who doesn't block strikes and doesn't support genocide.
Tell me, do you plan on showing up to the Democratic primaries to vote for a candidate who doesn't block strikes and doesn't support genocide?
Absolutely
Where did they say that's all it was?
Then tell me what benefits I'm supposed to enjoy. Because representation apparently isn't on the table.
That's because you have to show up and show up in numbers. Too many on the left cry about not having a perfect candidate, don't show up, and then wonder why the Dems keep going right when the left doesn't show up. Then, surprise, they have no representation and throw away 20 years of progress.
I don't care for Biden or trump, but I wasn't dumb enough not to see where we are right now before the vote was cast, so I showed up. So many stayed home that trump got elected with the popular vote despite not getting many more votes than he did last time.
But hey, we didn't vote in the woman who had some bad policies and could be worked with because one bad policy was worth throwing everything away. So we got the country we collectively voted (or sat out) for
We do though. We were roughly a third of the voters in the 2020 Democratic primaries and that number has probably gone up.
You don't show up in the general, so primary participation is a participation trophy. Trump wasn't on the ballot, so that's pretty much meaningless in the concept of defensive voting or the actual subject of the conversation. When Trump was in the ballot, the left was comparatively absent. 6.25M fewer people showed up, so objectively they didn't show up.
I'm not knocking participating in the primary, I do it every time I can. But if that's the extent of 'showing up, you're not doing much more than telling yourself you participated so you don't feel guilty about it.
That would mean Biden won the 2020 general election without us.
Gee, I guess showing up once makes up for the election on either side.
I guess the better statement is you only show up when convenient. Which is the same compliment I hear from the left about the Dems lol
I'm not following you. First you said we have to show up in numbers and I told you we do show up in numbers in the primary. Then you said we have to show up in the general election and I pointed out we did. Now you're saying that's not good enough. Either you're moving goalposts or you're doing a shit job of explaining yourself.
Spell it out for me plainly. Tell me exactly what we would have had to do since 2008 in order to be represented.
Nah, I'm sick of filling in every possible edge case in your argument. You say you show up, but you're making a point to point to specific/conditional situations yet ignore the blindingly obvious answers of why you don't have the representation you want.
Show up and vote consistently and change can happen. As it is, I tire of listening to people complain about lack of representation when they choose not to vote for a viable candidate in the general when they had the opportunity to do so because they didn't line up 100%.
If that's not clear enough for you, you're beyond my help.
But as we've already established, we did vote for a viable candidate in the 2020 general election. Do you think we lined up with Biden 100% back in 2020? It really seems like you're the one missing the blindingly obvious answer.
"Loyalty" to a party is not a good thing, for one.
That's pretty rich coming from someone arguing we are morally obligated to vote for Democratic politicians. You can't get any more loyal than that.
Did I mention morality? First Past the Post is an enormously flawed voting system. But until we get rid of it, that's the system we have.
Republicans, are by nature, essentially a mono culture. Conservativism demmands conformity. Hate taxes, Hate foreigners, hate "the gays", hate science and edumacashun.
Democrats, while not Progressive, pick up everyone else, which includes progressives. Progressives, tend to be open and accepting of what is different.
Except increasingly, they are not. Just with the last election, because every Democrat didn't 100% say "Fuck Israel, Free Palestine", then now all Democrats are evil and should never be supported.
Ya'll are single issue voting just as bad as the shitty Republicans will single issue vote on say, No Abortion.
The Democrats aren't great, but they exist as the compromise based system our Government SHOULD BE.
And maybe they would run more Progressive types and shift back Left but why should they bother right now? They could run some hyper progressive trans candidate who hatees Israel, but that candidate says one "wrong" thing on one issue and the mob turns on them and says "SeE, aLl DeMoCrAts aRe bAd."
That said, I am still not entirely convinced that a lot of the "All Dems Suck" rhetoric isn't the Left side version of bad foreign actors that have turned the GOP into the MAGA Nazi party.
Because they're losing without us.
Because you will never be happy anyway. May as well shift right and try to push towards the perfect Nqzi candidates like MAGA.
How do you know?
Having read their comment, probably “because every Democrat didn’t 100% say “Fuck Israel, Free Palestine”, then now all Democrats are evil and should never be supported.”
That’s them observing progressives disagree with a party stance then refuse to vote for the party over that single issue. The extrapolation is that progressives are more likely to become single issue voters, therefore more difficult to cater to, therefore maybe not worth the effort from the party’s perspective.
Help me understand your comment. Are you suggesting if we voiced disagreement with more than one issue with Democratic politicians then the claim that we "will never be happy anyway" would be unfounded?
No, I saw you ask why RamenJunkie would believe that progressives are single issue voters (as in “will not vote for a candidate because of one issue”) when, in their previous comment, they had already pointed to the support of Israel as an example of progressives not voting for a candidate over one issue. I found it annoying that you either ignored or missed that and asked a question for information sitting in front of you, so I copy and pasted a key piece of that information to hopefully get you considering how the arguments contained in one comment you responded to might relate to your question for a later one. It seems I may have failed at that.
Personally, I don’t know that truly single issue voters exist. I think there’s a lot of frustration with the complacency of the Democrat party and supporting genocide is just the straw that broke the camel’s back for a lot of people.
But my view was not the motivation for my comment, just my frustration with circular questioning.
Then your reading comprehension is trash. I asked him how he knows we "will never be happy anyway".
My whole comment is 11 words and you couldn't bother to read it correctly.