669
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 169 points 1 year ago

They call themselves the Party of Lincoln while simultaneously defending the Confederacy.

Baffling.

[-] RoyalEasy@lemmy.ca 57 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I got banned from the /conservative community on .ee because one of those idiots was saying that Democrats are the ones who support the Confederacy.

I posted five pics of traitor flags at Trump rallies and the mod banned me for "bad faith."

He left up the lies that I refuted though, just like a cryptofascist would.

[-] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 23 points 1 year ago

See, they didn't even play their shitty little game correctly. You don't say the Democrats were the party of the Confederacy. You say the Democrats were the party of slavery. And then you ignore the connection between the Confederacy and Slavery. Then hope no one brings up the Southern Strategy and the obvious realignment.

Obviously it falls apart if you think about it for even a second, but it's not designed to convince anyone. It's designed to sound good to people who won't think about it for even a second, and annoy the people who would.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

I've been saying for years that it all not making a lick of sense is the point. It's a dog whistle for those on board, and an open insult to everyone else.

I know exactly the user making that claim and the mod that banned you.

They subscribe to a different reality over there.

[-] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago

The only thing consistent with conservatives is the cognitive dissonance. They will hold two radically contrary ideas and do the most idiotic mental rationalizing why that usually hinges on them as a person making some arbitrary judgement. They're all unimaginative idiots who should be used for just manual labor.

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nah, there is not internal cognitive dissonance. They say stupid shit to pander to their stupid base, but they are the party of the rich. They know exactly what they are saying; but their goal is, and has always been to advance the goals of the rich.

At the lowest level that means ensuring the rich get richer. At the highest level it means ensuring class and race division, creating a system of oppressive laws that only apply to those who can’t afford to be in their class, and merging their financial interests quite literally with the government (corporatocracy).

They pretend they are against abortion for religious means. They are against abortion because it’s the poor that keep them rich, and they want poor children to be born and join the system.

They pretend they support our troops in defense. They support war because taxpayer money goes directly into their pockets from military defense contractors. Then they consistently vote against veteran’s support bills because they don’t give a shit about the troops.

They say they support small government. But they want the government to consistently get involved to force private corporations to allow their hate speech to flourish.

The list goes on and on.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago

Right. Conservative behavior makes a whole lot more sense when you assume they believe rich people deserve to be that way, that other people are inherently bad, and they need to keep them down.

Trick is, they know centrists would never go along with it if they came right out and said that. They don't have enough numbers on their own to implement these policies in a democracy. That's where all the nonsense statements come from. They're preying on people who deeply believe both sides have good and bad points, but who don't have a good filter for junking the bad ones.

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Remember that cognitive dissonance actually causes mental health issues even if they are under the surface. These people actually suffer from it.

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Thank you for using ‘cognitive dissonance’ the right way.

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Party of Lincoln('s murderer)

[-] crsu@lemmy.world 68 points 1 year ago

The confederacy lost, deal with it. If you want to own people be born a billionaire like a smart person

It's about states rights!

The right for individual states to ensure black people are enslaved.

[-] NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago

Article 1 of the Confederate Constitution made it illegal for any Confederate state unilaterally outlaw slavery.

It wasn't even about states rights a little bit.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Some light reading, for anyone unfamiliar with the Confederate Constitution

Article 1, Section 9(4):

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

States are not allowed to impair the right to own slaves–specifically, negro slaves. "But there were slaves of all races!" And only one race was mentioned in the Confederate Constitution.

Article 4, Section 2(1):

The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

Again, the right to own slaves is protected, and I do not have the right to claim or free any slaves that set foot in my state after escaping from their owner in another.

Article 4, Section 2(3):

No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due.

My state cannot pass a law that frees any slave that sets foot on our soil, and furthermore, we must deliver any slaves that make their way here back to their owner.

Article 4, Section 3(3):

The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.

Emphasis mine. Any new states allowed into the Confederacy must protect the institution of slavery, specifically negro slavery, as it exists in the Confederate States at the time of their founding. If my state is annexed, I have no right to decline participation in the institution of slavery; I must allow my citizens to own people–specifically, to own negroes.

But yeah, states' rights and all that.

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago

Lincoln would be a Democrat as would Theodore Roosevelt. Both were Progressives in their time.

The future of the Republican Party is either a huge shift to the left, like all the way to the left or to disappear and be replaced by another Progressive Party. Democrats would stay where they are and be the Center Right Party.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago

No way in hell that the GOP shifts to the left at this point. I hope you're right about a progressive party emerging someday, but I have my doubts.

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Political parties are not static. When Trump falls the Republican brand dies. They will reinvent themselves as a left wing party to regain the power they lost. It won't look anything like it does now by 2030.

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

I'll take any odds you're offering.

They've spent the last 40 years veering further and further right, consolidating their base of bigots whilst alienating everyone else.

Even if there was a will to pivot left (which there isn't), an entire party doesn't become everything it hates in 6 years.

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

The Republican Party shifted from left to right in the 1960s. There isn't growth on the right, there is encredible growth on the left. MAGA and Progressives already have a lot in common on policy ideas, a hate for government, that shift isn't that hard to do.

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

The Republican Party shifted from left to right in the 1960s.

Uh.

The last hurrah of leftism in the GOP was Teddy, and even he was mild compared to the radicals of the 1870s. The GOP has been the party of finance and big business since the 1880s, and of unregulated capitalism since the 1920s. That they recently became exceptionally racist as well (instead of merely typically racist) is little more than incidental to that.

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

that shift isn’t that hard to do.

Very much agree to disagree on that one. You're asking all the idiots who were told to hate woke people that they're now best buds with them. You're assuming the progressives are going to come down with a case of collective amnesia and not tell these people to jump off a cliff.

Come on.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

The Republican Party shifted from left to right in the 1960s. There isn’t growth on the right, there is encredible growth on the left.

Then maybe Democrats should try appealing to the left instead of trying to appease the right.

Thank you fellow time traveler!!

Any tips to avoid the temporal jail? Or you just were an early adopter?

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

It's a common trend in Political Science, adapt or die.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Any tips to avoid the temporal jail?

Don't go to Hawking's party. It's a sting operation.

[-] Thrashy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The party tried to move towards the center after Romney lost in 2012, but instead the alt-right seized control, pushed it even further toward the extreme right, and in the process put Trump in power for four years. The lesson the GOP's current leadership learned from that was to always double down, no matter what.

If Trump loses in 2024, I would put my money on the party falling into the clutches of out-and-proud white supremacists, collapsing from internal conflict between its various factions, or (probably) both.

[-] 0ops@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

At this point, I think it's more likely that they'll dissolve and be replaced than them actually moving left

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

They aren’t saying that current members become liberal. Eventually the radicals will move elsewhere and the remaining GOP will go closer to where they were 40 years ago.

[-] manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml 34 points 1 year ago

https://nitter.net/JoeBiden/status/1740221284284256645#m

good practice to be providing a link to a post you've screenshotted so people can check it's real easily, OP

[-] xusontha@ls.buckodr.ink 29 points 1 year ago

She should go read Alexander H. Stephens's (VP of Confederacy) Cornerstone Speech

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition. [Applause.] This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

[-] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Look just because it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and explicitly goes on record telling you it is without a doubt a duck doesn't necessarily mean it is a duck because ducks don't usually go on record about anything. Besides, just because something behaves like a duck before you give it immense political power to control your life doesn't mean you should assume said "duck" will behave like a duck after you give it political power. Most "duck" like entities only behave like ducks to get elected and are actually chickens at heart so you have nothing to worry about so don't listen to their quacking THEY ARENT DUCKS OK.

pstttttttttttt, by the way to all you patriotic citizens out there trying to decide who to vote for, our candidate SURE loves hanging around at parks eating bread tossed to them by old ladies!

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

Sort of insane the reason for the civil war is debated. Sure, it was a confluence of factors but it's pretty obvious slavery was #1 by far

[-] Wolf_359@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

An oft-repeated Reddit comment goes something like this:

When you know a little about the civil war, you think it's about slavery.

When you know a little more about the civil war, you realize there were other factors.

When you know a lot about the civil war, you realize it was all about slavery.

[-] Franzia 19 points 1 year ago

Lincoln wasnt GOP, the southern strategy is why republicans and democrats effectively swapped parties. Its a bit more complicated, but the democrat party was founded by conservatives.

[-] Nikki@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

still pissed off that i share a name with this asshat

Fight her, Highlander style.

[-] Nikki@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

may the best nikki win (ME!!!!)

[-] maryjayjay@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

There can be only one

[-] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, well just imagine how the comet feels.

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Go by Nimarata as a power move.

[-] blahsay@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I always thought the war was over states rights, specifically the right to keep slaves, but generally too?

[-] LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch 3 points 1 year ago

They specifically mention the right to keep slaves in their succession.

The southern states wanted to enforce their laws on the northern states.

"States rights" is a modern reframing of the story.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2023
669 points (100.0% liked)

Political Memes

5940 readers
1847 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes 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 misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS