12
The Truth
(mander.xyz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2025
12 points (100.0% liked)
Political Memes
9732 readers
2364 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 just wrote a book on why we MUST do sham liberal electoral politics and advocated for voting for genocide. You're a capitalist, you're a liberal, and you're clueless.
Take your annoying trolley problem bullshit and hilariously vapid and vaccuous essays and go fuck yourself, liberal.
Voting for genocide is exactly who you are, and no words you can muster will spill blood on my hands. Only one of us voted to condemn Palestinians: you.
Still hurtling insults and dodging questions. It appears that's all you're capable of. Have you ever had an original thought? Say whatever you need to help you sleep at night mate
Capitalist. Liberal.
lol
Shouldn't you be campaigning for another genocidal candidate? How do you have time to drop "lol" when we need to get out and voooooooote?!
lol
Who will you vote for in 2028? Gavin? Pete? Which clown are you going to thrust in front of me and demand I vote for them? Kamala again?
LeSsEr eViL shit is still evil, genocide-boy.
You seem upset. I'm not trying to demand you do anything. In fact, I'd reckon we share the same views politically, in all cases except for vote/no vote. There are many people that hold the stance that not voting was the morally correct move to make. I have never seen someone defend that stance though, they all devolve into ragebaiting, just as you are now. I was really hoping I could hear why someone would obstain from voting, and the line of reasoning they used to come to the conclusion that it was morally the only correct option, because I wholeheartedly disagree, but am open to having my mind changed.
But you seem to be purposefully playing dense to be a troll. I would expect someone who holds such a strong opinion as yours would want to help bring people to an understanding of that strong opinion, but you don't seem to care about that at all. From what I can tell, you just want to point fingers and feel like you are above everyone else.
If you think for a split second that we "share views except for voting" you truly are out of your depth.
One of us is a socialist. The other is what we can only assume is a SocDem, otherwise known as a liberal, or as you've just recently learned, a capitalist. We believe in completely different things. The rich part is how you think you're on the left yet have zero understanding of where the line actually is.
Also, I know you read an LLM summary of Reform or Revolution. You're intellectually bankrupt and politically confused. And also completely owned. Are you going to revert back to dropping "lol" soon?
Do you notice that your responses ignore almost the entirety of mine? Do you notice that almost every single thing you've said thus far is an insult? Do you notice that you are creating a narrative of myself that doesn't line up with what I'm saying? Do you know how to structure an argument? Do you know how to explain your own opinion? I'd like to have a genuine discussion about your opinion, but you don't seem capable of that.
Also, I actually did read Reform or Revolution. I took a good hour and a half out of my day to do it. And I only responded "lol" when you lost your composure and started responding with zero substance. If you can't be bothered to hold your end of a conversation, even to the insanely low standards you have been thus far, why would I put any effort into a real response?
Are you a SocDem? Was I right?
No, you were not right. I'm a Socialist through and through. Nothing good can come from capitalism or a democratic republic. I just feel that I have a have a moral obligation to do what I can to save innocent lives, especially if all it takes is to swallow my pride and disdain for the game I am forced to play and check a box. As the very document you had me read suggests, I don't believe the system can be changed from within. The system needs to be dismantled from the outside. I feel like a broken record because I've already stated all of this.
A socialist who advocates entryism into US electoral politics is confused and probably not a socialist. You haven't even heard of Luxemburg's essay, a staple of early reading lists. Have you consumed any socialist theory, not through an LLM? What in your head makes you a socialist in the same breath you, in your own words, vote for genocide of the Palestinian people?
Is it Gavin? Kamala? Who's next? You're a Westerner roleplaying as a leftist. You will never convince a leftist to sponsor a genocide like you have. It's not happening now, or ever. The idea that you see benefit in voting for a genocidal administration means you're so much farther right than you'll probably ever realize. Your harm reduction theory will go down in history as complicity.
Time for a "lol"?
You respond so angrily and accusatorily. Why would I reply with an lol if you are actually making an attempt at communication? Why do you assume I use LLMs? I have given zero indication that either of those beliefs would be true. You are showing yourself to be someone that comes up with a view that you don't change despite all signs pointing to it being wrong. Either you are a troll, or your preferred method of discussion is to speak loudly with fingers in your ears.
I've read plenty of socialist theory, but I have never gone through a socialist reading list. Plenty of derivative works cover the same stuff as that pamphlet.
And again, you seem to be purposefully ignoring my point, likely because you've already decided what you think I believe, and are unwilling to change that view despite me telling you you are wrong.
I don't advocate for any candidates on either side. There is no candidate that I back. If I could start the revolution myself tomorrow, I would. But I can't. No one can. The way I see it, the revolution won't come due to who you do or do not vote for. If you disagree, explain why. Tell me, what are you accomplishing by not voting? That's what I've been asking since the very beginning, and yet you, for some reason, choose to continue being uncouth and not actually engaging in this conversation.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with refusing to sponsor genocide, and everything wrong with the opposite.
You are a confused SocDem who readily admits to intentionally voting for genocide. To not antagonize you would be a failure of ethics.
I just want to understand your stance. What are you accomplishing by not voting?
What did you accomplish by voting? You sold your soul for a game you didn't even win. It's no wonder you're so agitated by my ethics.
You seem to think I'm upset. I've been enjoiying our chat. I've been on the internet long enough to not let some random troll get on my nerves. I'm just genuinely curious in what logic lead you to your decision. Now, I've already said what I accomplished by voting. But you should know that, as you have presumably been reading my responses. If you aren't going to answer my question in your next response, I'm going to have to call it here. I'm patient, but my enjoyment of this conversation was from the pretense that you would eventually stop your seething and barking and actually open up on your thoughts around voting. From your current behaviour, I'm disappointed to say I can't see that happening. I'll just have to find someone else with your same stance that is actually up for a discussion.
I will never, for even a second, back down from liberals. Your ideology is shameful, and you know that because you're trying to pass yourself off as a socialist.
You sponsor genocide and try to justify it in bad faith. You got called out and dismantled and all you have left is "muh civility". And now you've run out of steam.
Is it Gavin?
So just to be clear, the reason you didn't vote is that you won't back down to liberals? Sounds a lot like "owning the libs, " which is the reason I see a lot for why people voted for Trump. I mean, it's finally a reason I guess. Thank you for sharing.
Earlier you referenced the trolley problem. In the standard trolley problem setup, do you think that the morally correct move is to not touch the lever?
I don't argue in bad faith. I'm not being malicious or dishonest. I genuinely feel that, as folks who are voting-eligible in the US, we are in a form of the trolley problem. I don't know how it could be seen any other way.
As for being called out and dismantled, you haven't even contested my decision besides saying it's wrong. That's not an argument. I want to see some logic behind why you condemn a choice, and logic as to why your choice is better. If it's because voting leads to genocide, I want to hear your explanation on why not voting doesn't lead to genocide. Considering that, by your own admission, you make voting decisions based around "not backing down to liberals", maybe you really don't hold that opinion with any logic to back it.
For a scoialist, you are very focused on specific candidates. I'm not going to tell you who to vote for, I don't think of things in that way. When it comes time to vote, I suggest voting for whoever you personally think will lead to the most harm reduction, as it's the only good option I see us having. Expecting more from the system is putting more faith into capitalism than it deserves. Last presidential election, I felt that was Kamala, and honestly not by much, but I'd genuinely like to hear why you may have thought that not voting would be the least harmful option.
I thought you were done? Can't help yourself, eh? Now you're asking me trolley problem shit and talking about harm reduction.
Sheesh. Totally and thoroughly cooked. You're metaphorically short circuiting like all liberals do when pressed on Gaza.
You act as though I've contradicted myself. You answered my question, so I continued the conversation. If you hadn't, I wouldn't have. I asked a follow up question, hoping you'd answer that one, too. Like last time, if you don't answer it, I'll have to call it here.
In 2028, are you going to ask me to vote for Mayor Pete? Lmao.
Edit: Dunked