Why is it on a liberal private business owner to provide a public bathroom? This just seems like the myth people use to show why liberalism is either phony or unsustainable.
It should be on the local government/community to provide public options.
"I support trans people having safe access to bathrooms"
"may I safely access this bathroom?"
"Are you poor?"
That is like the weirdest attempt at an argument I've ever heard. Somehow we have to make even this stupid fucking discussion about trans people and bathrooms bc apparently that is all some people obsess about. JFC.
Do you let every stranger that asks to use your bathroom, use your bathroom? No.
Do you let people who are guests in your house use your bathroom? Yes.
Would a customer be the equivalent of a guest in a business? Yes.
Do you consider trans people to be humans like anyone else? Yes.
Simple. Mind fucking blown. 🤯
Um the sign is literally about safety for all people with genders specifically mentioned. Bathrooms in public are relatively dangerous for trans people, hence the comment. Like if you want safety and respect for people, and then refuse to help them, you actually just want someone else to sort out the world you're making more dangerous.
Also literally yes I do, I live near a bushwalk exit that's popular, and have had a few knocks on the door by people busting or thirsty and I do help them because I'm not a horrible human who wants to watch someone shit themselves or pass out from heatstroke. What else could I do? If I wont who will. Would it be nice if the council put in a tap, bins, and a dunny? sure. In the meantime I will treat people who ask for a trivial bit of assistance with the decency and respect they deserve.
But they took the public options away due to private lobbying from big business so that the only places you can be comfortable in public are places of consumption. No public toilets, no public water sources, no drinking in public. Basically we're left with no escape to consumerism. Economic liberalism in the form of legalised bribes aka "lobbying" is to blame for this.
In the context of this meme, centrist liberalism is claiming progressive credentials on the left pane, and showing its true face on the right pane. Liberalism is all about private property. So no matter what they say about caring about these issues, if you're not paying you aren't welcome. Liberal values are phony because money always trumps them. Look at how Dems treated paying customer Israel vs non-paying folks in Gaza.
I don't have time to argue bc I have to go to my publicly funded job soon that's about to be gone because of Republicans, but as a civil libertarian I can tell you that's a completely BS argument.
If you'd like to read about privatized corporate government maybe check out this information on the Heritage Foundation and their role creating a "free market" in post Soviet Russia
Here you go:
Here is some info about the Heritage Foundation and the first go-between for US and Russia businesses
Here is some information about how right-wing billionaire Peter Thiel has been involved in Trump's privatization of unethical AI since at least 2017
It seems like a lot of the stuff being blamed on Elon Musk was actually Theil's idea, he was just smart enough to be quiet about it and let Elon be the face of taking a chainsaw to government bureaucracy (and consequently any publicly funded goods and services).
I'm not sure I understand what your point is. The US has been a plutocracy for a long time. The Republican vs Democrat debate is all about to what degree that is the case. The Democrats are slightly more benevolent when they are at the head of the plutocracy, I'll grant you that.
Not sure if you actually read that, but the modern Republican vs Democrat political parties have very likely been intentionally polarized and turned into what they are today because of the Heritage Foundation, in order to destroy democracy and create an oligarchy.
I am not a fan of the DNC, but again it's blatantly false to claim the actions of shitty individuals in the DNC are representative of all liberal values. Calling them slightly more benevolent when in power is either an extremely misinformed opinion or a blatant attempt to spread disinformation.
Over the last 4 months (starting literally on Jan 21) I have personally watched the polarized GOP take a literal sledgehammer to publicly funded programs in science and healthcare that (while imperfect) did an extraordinary amount of good for everyday Americans. The amount of damage done to individuals in my state who were dependent on Medicaid (some were patients in the free clinic where I volunteer and some were my own family members) is appalling and inexcusable.
I hope anyone that reads your comment will not be misinformed. I'm sorry if it wasn't your intention, but (even putting aside losing my own job in science) this is something I've watched unnecessarily hurt so many people around me, as healthcare systems begin to ramp down acceptance of Medicaid in preparation for cuts that the Republicans said over and over weren't going to happen. That was bullshit, and your description, is bullshit.
An imperfect system of very basic benefits is being made even worse in order to justify a tax cut (in addition to the billions that were already stolen via "DOGE" savings) for people who already take so much, and don't contribute their fair share to society while leeching off corporate welfare and accusing people relying on those benefits of being the leeches. "Slightly more benevolent," is an ignorant and dangerous way to describe imperfect but expanded access to healthcare vs the the passive aggressive genocide of undesirable populations through Mediciad cuts that are only necessary to benefit the wealthy who have taken so much more than what they have contributed.
It seems to me we are really only arguing about the degree to which the Republicans are worse than the Democrats. You are arguing the case that the Dems are significantly more benevolent, but that's a very subjective assessment and depends what type of issues you decide to focus on. If you are more focused on international affairs and the number of brown people being killed by US manufactured weapons then there is no significant difference between the parties. If you are focused on domestic issues like health care then, sure, Obamacare is significantly better than nothing, even if it is a pale imitation of what a properly functioning health care system looks like.
When you look at the big(ger) picture, the US is governed under a plutocratic system of government whichever side is in power. The only way to have a properly functioning liberal democracy is to prevent owners of private capital from having any say in how the country is governed (so no more corporate donations, industry lobbyists, legislation written by large corporations, etc). But neither mainstream party has any intention of tackling those issues, or tackling wealth inequality. There's sadly very little policy difference between the two parties on those issues in my opinion, and I don't think it's misleading to point it out.
Omgaaaauuuuhghhd bruuuhhh, one group was shitty and wouldn't take a firm stance against Israel bc they didn't have a fucking backbone. They're shitty people that need to step down. They are not essentially the same.
The group you're comparing them to:
•has said they wanted to bomb Gaza into oblivion and build a resort.
•are currently snatching students who attended pro-palestenian protests off of U.S. streets and shipping them to detention centers hundreds of miles away, (these detention centers are located in my own state in the desolate middle of nowhere, where even lawyers are afraid to even go protest because of threats of harm or being disappeared)
•are dismantling 3 civil rights offices for getting in the way of their immigration policies, one exists to provide benefits to refugees, one that exists to investigate claims of inhumane treatment in those detention center, and the third isn't even focused on immigration, it exists to protect civil rights and liberties for all Americans dealing with DHS agencies and had to be created after the patriot act was passed by Republicans following 9/11 and too many rights were being violated
•have repeatedly openly ignored and publicly joked about just tossing due process, which is a constitutional right that anyone in this country is supposed to be entitled to, regardless of citizenship. When asked a little over a week ago if he needed to uphold the constitution, Trump said he didn't know. Not like a joke. He really didn't know if that was something he would be expected to comply with as president, as long as his lawyers told him he could ignore it.
Dems are not liberal, they are hyper capitalist. Can we get a more fitting example of liberalism?
they are hyper capitalist.
Ie, liberals?
So they're liberal, got it.
Neoliberalism is the dominant form of liberalism not only in the US but in most of the west, so it's safe to assume that's the definition we're working with here. But here, I'll give you another example:
Look at how ~~Dems~~the German government has treated paying customer Israel vs non-paying folks in Gaza.
Tell me you've never had to clean blood of the walls of a stall in a toilet at your minimum wage retail job without telling me you've never had to clean blood off the wall of a stall in the toilet at your minimum wage retail job.
I get the joke, i agree with the message but I also agree with the bathroom being for customers only...
It's a mistake you only make once, they just need to use the bathroom and you feel like an asshole for turning them away so you let them use it and the next thing you know you're cleaning fucking blood off the fucking wall.
You know that isolated hostility is the end point of trying to protect yourself from harm right?
Being a good person and practicing pro social beliefs means opening yourself up to the possibility of being taken advantage of. It is ludicrous to hurt everyone, or at least an entire class of people, because of the occasional actions of some.
Tell me you’ve never had to clean blood of the walls of a stall in a toilet at your minimum wage retail job without telling me you’ve never had to clean blood off the wall of a stall in the toilet at your minimum wage retail job.
I have. I did it and if things go well, I'll be hired and it will be part of my job.
I've cleaned blood, piss, shit, vomit, cum. It wasn't pleasant. It won't be pleasant when I have to do it for minimum wage again.
I'm a broke bastard. I like being able to take a shit like any human being. Human beings should be able to take a shit without expecting to pay markups on concessions and things.
Why do we put a price on the human need of removing waste? The workers are already paid. The toilets are used no matter who uses them. The things must be cleaned already.
Exactly, I feel like this is kind of a BS argument made by the right to say this is why liberal values are fake vs on the flip side they would be showing a wrecked bathroom in a private business to prove why liberals are suckers and liberalism is unsustainable. Like "This is what liberals want for America."
In reality most liberals just want you to fairly tax that business and property owners and use those tax dollars to reinvest in the community by building and maintain public restrooms and other public spaces... It's really not rocket science.
Nobody could reasonably argue it's on you to provide public access to the bathroom in your home, why would it be different for a business? Guests/customers are one thing, but liberalism is not arguing it's on you as an individual to take care of society.
It's on society to take care of people, and on you to contribute to and reinvest in society as in individual to be part of something greater than just yourself.
It's on society to take care of people, and on you to contribute to and reinvest in society as in individual to be part of something greater than just yourself.
What exactly are you trying to say over all? That is a fine line and all, but all your comments in the thread revolve around protecting private property and less about private property rights.
Left was posted by the staff. Right was posted by the owner.
Radical Libertarian Capitalism
Everyone is equal, as long as you have the money.
No money? DIE, MOTHERFUCKER!
Real life Ferengi.
I always did like how the Ferengi found human slavery abhorrent.
But also didn't really acknowledge that their women were effectively slaves.
Remind me of Orwell.
"All animals are equal. Some, however are more equal than others."
As long as you can pay you can pee..
You can pee for free and thousands of other places, including your house. I am allowed to put rules of who can pee and shit in my bathroom.
But what if everyone in that street decides to do the same? Then there are no longer thousands of other places. If I'm an hour away from home and you don't let people use your shop's bathroom I think it's fair to assume you might end up with some problems.
There's public toilets. You might even go to a different street.
That depends on where you are. Usually the public toilets are provided by nearby establishments though, right?
Liberalism is the closest thing to an ideology capitalists will ever have.
And they will stop welcoming any of those if it benefits them financially.
Who is they? Do you even know who you're talking about to make such an assumption?
Normally "they" (and other pronouns) refer to the subject or the topic of the previous context. In this case, to the pictured venue displayed as a metaphor. I hope this clears things for you and cheers you up the little bit you need.
I'm aware of what they means grammatically, but thank you anyway.
Please name the they in this case. If know this company and their previous history to know how they will react in the future, then I'd like to know who it is.
Otherwise, you're just throwing a blanket statement.
There are plenty of businesses around me that would not bend the knee. I'm sorry you live in a place that doesn't have that.
Please refer to the second sentence of the comment you are answering to.
I saw a yard sign once that said "all are welcome here", right next to the "no trespassing" sign. Struck me as contradictory and made me curious what it meant to them.
“all are welcome here”, right next to the “no trespassing” sign
I read that as "I don't care who you are or what you look like, just make sure you're invited first"
All are welcome here was a campaign for welcoming refugees, I think. The no trespassing was for people wanting to fish from the river bank on their property that bordered public land, most of whom are first generation immigrants, Hispanic or Hmong. I interpreted it "people are welcome in our country, just not like, HERE." I mean, I get it, but it had some of the same energy as this post.
Just FYI most places, if the water is navigable (usually around 3ft) there's a right of way a few feet either side of the bank.
Not a great idea to get into an argument with the land owner but legally it might give them some cover regarding fishing access.
That's pretty much rainbow capitalism, which is but a small part of liberalism.
In reality, liberalism is much worse when it comes to things like human rights, singing it's praises and championing democracy and freedom while committing/supporting atrocities, like Bill Clinton administration's war crimes, Tony Blair's invasion of Iraq, EU's anti-immigration barbarism, Trudeau's arms sales, current Israel Palestine genocide, etc.
It's baffling how many regular people call themselves liberal while not seeing the contradictions/utter hypocrisy. Even on ideological level, you can't support things such as equality and free-market economics, they directly go against one another.
like Bill Clinton administration's war crimes
Not defending liberalism, especially the Third Way perspective popularized by the Clinton's. However, when you are talking about Clinton and war crimes are you talking about the war in Bosnia?
Imo intervening in an ethnic cleansing is just about the only decent reason to go to war in the first place. There were plenty of war crimes going around in Bosnia, but the vast majority of them were happening to the Bosniaks, whom the Clinton administration was aiding.
Clinton bombed a pharmaceutical factory on the suspicion that it was being used to manufacture bioweapons. Even if it were, it was still a war crime. But it probably wasn't, and many suspected Clinton of deliberately killing people to distract from his infidelity scandal. That's what most people think of when they hear "Clinton war crimes."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shifa_pharmaceutical_factory
But yeah, in Bosnia, he said he was helping genocide victims, but one way he did this is bombing civilian targets.
Clinton bombed a pharmaceutical factory on the suspicion that it was being used to manufacture bioweapons
Ahh, yeah definitely a shitty thing to do. I don't know if war crime is the best descriptor, more of a crime against humanity imo.
but one way he did this is bombing civilian targets.
This article is atrociously biased, to the point where it's blatantly ahistorical. The attempt to "both sides" the war crimes committed by the Serbs and Bosniaks is just immoral. It would be the equivalent of equating war crimes committed by the Palestinians with the genocidal reaction of Israel.
To my knowledge there was no intentional targeting of civilians in Kosovo, there was a refugee column that was mistakenly bombed, which NATO took responsibility for .
I don't really know much about this publisher, but I would be wary of any "leftist" publisher who back articles originally written for a libertarian rag.
Neoliberalism is the belief in inequality based on class.
Fascism is the belief in inequality based on identity.
No wonder, it's just a small hop.
restrooms must be a right... ;(
Food, housing and fair wages (especially to foreign workers) aren't even rights to these people, i highly doubt they're going to consider that
Do they welcome a union?
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, and discussion 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!
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)
0.5 [Provisional Rule] Use alt text or image descriptions to allow greater accessibility
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.
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 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.
