this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2025
-17 points (41.4% liked)

Flippanarchy

1469 readers
13 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.

  7. No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A little dated, but the Dems are still banging that drum.

all 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 44 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Not voting is a vote for whoever won. That's not like a complicated concept. Ambivalence means you're cool with either result, and you've contributed to the end result by not contributing at all.

The problem is when people want to not vote and then complain about a result they don't like. If you really don't see a difference between Trump and Harris, but you're not happy about the pedophilia, the rape, the military garrison enacting martial law, the higher taxes, lower wages, losing healthcare, kidnappings, and paving the rose garden, then you should have voted for something else.

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

But the moral prohibition on siding with any administration that endorses genocide will force a different flavor of the exact same logic that centrist liberalism has depended on for so long: hold your nose and align with the least worst thing. Only the least worst thing will no longer be the mild, ethics-agnostic emptiness of modern Western liberalism, nor will it be the multitude of barbaric authoritarians and their secret prisons. It will be communal solidarity, or else nothing, a walking away from all of this. Countless otherwise pragmatic people who would in any other circumstance choose liberalism by default will instead decide none of this is worth the damage to one’s soul. They will instead support no one, vote for no one, wash their hands of any ordering of the world that results in choices no better than this. And the obvious centrist refrain—But do you want the deranged right wing to win?—should, after even a moment of self-reflection, yield to a far more important question: How empty does your message have to be for a deranged right wing to even have a chance of winning? Of all the epitaphs that may one day be written on the gravestone of Western liberalism, the most damning is this: Faced off against a nihilistic, endlessly cruel manifestation of conservatism, and somehow managed to make it close.

— Omar El Akkad, One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, Chapter 7, Lesser Evils; italic emphases his, bold emphasis mine.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 17 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Only if you otherwise would have voted for Trump. So unlikely if you are a leftist.

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 days ago (3 children)

True. But the sad reality is that the American version of "democracy" is one where unless you vote for (or cheer-lead for) the Democrats, you're gonna be accused of anything from being a Russian spy to a secret MAGA supporter. It's absolutely psychotic behavior from them. The whole point of a democracy imo is that you get to vote according to your own conscience, not forced to compromise yourself into voting against your preferred candidate and for arming a foreign genocide, for example. The Dems seem perfectly happy to make those compromises so long as their own lives aren't too negatively impacted. That's why they lost a lot of left votes, that and the fact they were too busy courting conservative voters to make a single concession to the left.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 13 points 4 days ago

You don’t get to say that in a system with first past the post. You seem to misunderstand the situation here. @themeatbridge has it correct. If you don’t vote then you’re voting for the person that won, you’re not voting against the person that lost. In FPTP that’s the only outcome. Your “conscience” might not let you choose to vote for a Democrat because you think that it’s just going to perpetuate the same genocide, but then when the genocide gets much much worse under a Republican you are directly to blame. You don’t get to dodge the issue anymore. This is the same for any issue, especially if the candidate actually campaigned on it.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Maybe in an ideal world. But I think the logic of lesser evil voting is pretty unassailable in the US electoral system. It’s not true political autonomy but it can keep fascists out of office.

I think everyone on the left (from a US perspective, including democrats) needs to take a deep breath and realize we need to work together right now to defeat fascism, despite our strong disagreements.

But I think the logic of lesser evil voting is pretty unassailable in the US electoral system.

I could scarcely agree less. Once a party does a genocide, they're dead to me.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

in the US you have to first assess the situation. if the worst candidate may win, you should vote the lesser evil. if the lesser evil will likely win without your vote, it's time to support a third party that's even better.

[–] Smeagol666@crazypeople.online 6 points 3 days ago

It's as if they are obstinately refusing to learn from their mistakes. Personally, I think their incompetence is feined, just like pro wrestling. It's one big club, and you ain't in it.

they still reflexively feel like they need to verbally punish whoever is within reach whenever The Shit Goblin does another fuck up. the movement is cooked