ID: 3 panel comic:
-
A surprised looking person pops in to existence on a floating rock surrounded by fire, next to the devil.
-
The person asks “wait a second-- why’d I end up in hell??”
-
The devil, now taking up the entire frame, replies: “because centrism enables fascism”
You must log in or # to comment.
Refusing to vote because “I’m sick of <whatever>” also enables fascism.
If you’re not with us then you’re against us. I think the bad guys actually coined that phrase.
First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
- Martin Luther King Jr, Letter from the Birmingham Jail
Context for readers: The direct action MLK Jr spoke of was political action and progressive legislative reform. The reason I bring this up is sometimes Tankies and Anarchists use his words to incite violence, which MLK Jr would strictly oppose.
Non-violent protest is an opening offer, not the endgame. It’s a promise not to be violent so long as there’s an honest dialoge.
Without the threat of eventual violence, they have no reason to listen at all.
You’re not arguing against me, you are arguing against civil rights legend Martin Luther King Jr. and he can’t hear you.
Says the white moderate who was taught so by the establishment that doesn’t want you to consider violent opposition to their violent oppression a viable option, which he absolutely did, as, without even the slightest sense of irony because the reality is going over their head in its entirety, they tell you they "agree with you in the goal you seek, but cannot agree with your methods of direct action”.
Perhaps educate yourself on MLK and what he actually stood for, rather than what those who murdered him for opposing them want you to know, before you so confidently spread misinformation and continue in the task of whitewashing his legacy.
"Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. I am not unmindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results. Nations have frequently won their independence in battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself.”
1964, I guess white oppressors forced him to write this.
One of my most used quotes, in fact I used it earlier today, it’s just so fucking accurate.
I consider it to be the defining quote on how I choose to act as a person. If my words or actions aren’t aligned with the goal of total liberation, then I immediately reassess my position.
Definitely words to live by.
If a Nazi sits down at a table of 3 and nobody says anything. There are now 4 Nazis at that table.
My first saved comment on Lemmy.
I’m using this. Thanks!
If a centrist sits down at a table of three, and the three string him up and punish him for not falling into line… There were never less than three Nazi’s at the table.
But if nobody says anything, how do you know the fourth person is a Nazi?
I guess it’s assumed that you know that person is already a nazi, for example the person is Elon Musk. He won’t say anything, but you still know that he’s a nazi
3+1=4
Yes I’m glad you can do simple addition, but how’s your reading comprehension?
Good to know you’re the +1
No, I’m just trying to understand your logic.
A silent nazi sits at a table with three other silent people. Now they are all nazis?I believe the intention of that quote was that the other three knew the first was a Nazi.
There is nothing to call out or act on, if you do not know.
No, what you’re trying to do is twist the saying so it doesn’t apply to you.
Nowhere does it say anyone is silent. The Nazis are known to be Nazis, and you trying to find ways for it to be ok for you to sit with them is all the excuses we need to know that you are, in fact as has already been pointed out, the +1.
They literally said “nobody says anything”.
And it doesn’t say the nazi was known to be a nazi. You’re the only one twisting things here.I don’t hang out with nazis. To be frank I’ve been lucky enough to have never met one in person.
I just think it was a poorly worded message.
The capitalist status quo is protected by a political wing we call “liberalism” and a paramilitary wing we call “fascism.”
Carrot and stick, good cop/bad cop - pick your metaphor.
For far too long, leftists have laboured under the delusion that liberals are merely “misguided” people that can be “pushed” left as soon as we could get them to read this or that book by our favourite Beardy McDeadguy. This kind of understanding of these people we call “centrists,” “moderates,” and, by far the most accurate term, “liberals,” completely ignores the fact that it is liberalism - not fascism - that is the true ideology of privilege. Privilege that means that liberals are even more invested in the maintenance of the status quo that the rank and file of fascism are.
The left has always proven itself capable of defeating fascists - but it seems that it has no real answer to the insidious, co-opting tentacles of the liberal and the mountain of lies liberalism is built upon.
You’re right. I’m a liberal and we don’t like you leftists. Get out of our party and start your own. You’re the real fascism enablers.
Your party didn’t support gay marriage rights until what 2012 (at the behest of actual leftists and when it finally became politically expedient) and its major health care success was a Heritage Foundation plan full of means testing. It also actively supports an ongoing genocide.
Liberalism can never inherently provide a useful answer to the problems of capitalism, inequality, and climate change because it must protect private property rights and capital. Your party answers to corporate interests and that is a known fact.
Trump literally ran on anti-NAFTA and uses immigration as a scapegoat for peoples’ economic woes.
You’re the real fascism enablers.
Keep telling yourself that, liberal… especially when you watch the liberals you vote for “reaching across the aisle” to your fascist cousins.
So your solution is to increase the genocide and hostility while also pushing us further away from democracy? That just sounds like you’re resigned to being stupid and evil.
So your solution is to increase the genocide and hostility
That’s not my “solution,” liberal - that is what your precious status quo will be doing anyway.
No, that is a choice that you made. The two options were less and more and by abstaining from less you got more.
No, that is a choice that
Again, liberal. That’s not my “solution” - that is what your precious status quo will be doing anyway.
I’m totally fine, on paper, with actual centrists. It’s just that they actually seem to actually exist in the real world. Everyone claiming to be one is really just a right-wing conservative who’s afraid to say so.
I’m totally fine, on paper, with actual centrists
I’d like to know what I’m in the center of. Because if it’s a Nuremberg Rally, maybe that’s not where I want to be.
There is a middle ground between the unregulated facists capitalism of today and the anarchy or authoritarian socialism of tankies.
That middle ground means that capitalism is allowed but is regulated. Minimum wage is a living wage, slave or child labor products are not allowed on the market. We do have social services including healthcare and UBI. However, there is no middle ground on perceiving much less treating anyone as lesser. Nazis and supremacist groups and systems are stamped out like the filth they are.
There’s no lasting compromise with capitalism. Capitalism inherently depends on and leads to a concentration of wealth and power.
Capitalists can and do use that wealth and power to pervert the political system to their advantage, eventually chipping away at those regulations and social services. We saw this happen with the erosion of the gains from the New Deal and Union power over the late 20th century in the US and even in Europe we’ve been seeing austerity and far right parties start to take power and try to do the same.
Political freedom and equality is intrinsically tied to economic freedom and equality. We can’t really build a better society while there are still people with the means and motive to pull us back into servitude.
middle ground between the unregulated facists capitalism of today and the anarchy or authoritarian socialism
Sure. You can enjoy the moderate centrism of the LAPD, the United Fruit Company, and Focus on the Family.
Nazis and supremacist groups and systems are stamped out like the filth they are.
No they aren’t. They’re in the highest eschalons of authority.
Bud, I’m talking about what a middle ground centrist would want. It’s certainly not the past or current US government. It’s a lot lefter than is even available as choices besides maybe Bernie and the Squad. It just isn’t as left as tankies dream of.
Please read literally any socialist theory. Or at least any criticism of the Nordic model from the left.
And understand that “middle ground” arguments are fallacious and something being the middle ground does not make it the better or correct option.
Edit: Why Social Democracy Isn’t Good Enough - Second Thought
I usually don’t listen to videos but since you’re respectful so far I did listen to this one. We agree with the current reality of the system. I think what is neglected is that additional regulation (laws and constitutional amendments) are the only nonviolent way for a society to change. Enough good regulation results in first social democracy then moving closer to socialism. The major requirement is for companies/ceos/shareholders to be prevented from having the poison pill influence that they do under even Nordic social democracy. Sufficient taxation above a given limit is a relatively simple way of preventing the wealth hoarding that lets a person or company have that influence and preventing acquisitions and mergers that prevent diversification of economies.
I just don’t see the class/general consciousness necessary for “true” socialism to succeed being present in our lifetime. I can see social democracy as possible because of Bernie, AOC, and renewed working class solidarity.
That middle ground means that capitalism is allowed but is regulated
Lmfao, here’s a clue - capitalism IS regulated, and it’s still decaying in to fascism, because that’s what capitalism does.
Which is the perfect example of how centrism enables fascism - because you prioritise capitalism and its status quo along with the privileges they grant you, over the lives of the people it oppresses, marginalises, and literally kills to exist.
You are part of the problem, no matter how much faux logic you use to try and maintain your own cognitive dissonance.
Capitalism will always try and prioritize profit over all else. Effective regulation(again that doesn’t currently exist same as your tankie utopia) would enforce protections and itself be protected from capitalist interference. The problem for either of us is that greed exists, some people will always want more. No governmental change will remove them from society, unless you want to debate what scale of greed is allowable before a summary execution. I’d say allowing their existence within a limited framework that protects the rest of us without murder is better.
You are still talking about what is in this debate rather than what could be. An ideology of black and white absolutism inherently makes a “purity test” hierarchy. It’s why you’re already attacking me as part of the problem instead of any attempt to change my perspective. Same issue happened at both the first and second international because Marx and his followers didn’t believe in antiwar general strikes. At least we agree on something much more left than we have.
Any system devolves to some form of shit of allowed.
For real. We just need laws for people instead of corporations. Not an upheaval of society. I want to go to work and the supermarket and on a walk, not live in rags in tunnels hiding from robot spider things
You might want to learn what centrism actually is. Hint: it’s not a political position unto itself.
It doesn’t help that it seems the vast majority of people think that “centrism” is a political position unto itself, defined by being on the fence about everything and never committing to any stance on any issue.
As opposed to the actual definition, which is just someone whose collective of political positions is such that it’s not really accurate to refer to them as either kind of -winger.
It’s kind of like the bisexuality of politics. Actually, as I write that, a lot of biphobia, which comes from both the homo and hetero, is kind of rooted in the same bullshit ‘logic’. Just like the majority mentioned above see centrists the way I described, biphobes see bisexuals as indiscriminate sluts who are willing to bed anyone and everyone, as opposed to simply someone who is capable of being attracted to members of either sex.
If someone is “left-leaning” or “right-leaning”, that is an actual centrist, by definition. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be merely a ‘lean’.
centrists are close to the status quo common sense view.
the status quo is soon-to-be-mask-off-fascist neoliberal capitalism. which is very much right wing. which makes them (inadvertently or not) right wing.
they are even if they dont understand politics at all so they dont even know exactly what they believe in as long as their support ends up going to them.
you can be slightly left from right, that doesnt fundamentally change.
Problem is accepting the reality would mean they have to confront the fact that they’re on the wrong side of it, so they will do everything in their capabilities not to.
Lmmfao, GTFOH, centrist aren’t “oppressed” so you can fuck off with trying to compare them and their shitty choices in life to actual marginalised people who are actually oppressed for how they were fucking born
I like how you quoted a word that literally appears nowhere in my comment, lmao.
Also, learn how analogies work, goofball. You did the equivalent of reacting to me saying
eating breakfast and getting dressed are both things you do in the morning
with
Lmmfao, GTFOH, clothes aren’t ‘food’ so you can fuck off with trying to compare them"
which ties neatly into why they want “freedom” so much.
they want the freedom to be openly fascist.
Hi that’s me. Left leaning moderate. I disagree with a bunch of the crap on the left but I really don’t like a lot of what the right pulls either.
I will say that people on the left tend to violently push me away when we disagree on something where as the right tends to go “yeah I disagree with you, but you can hang out here if you want”. So it’s really easy to see why so many people have been pulled to the right over the last 10+ years. I’ve witnessed it first hand when I started doing it myself. I was staring down the far right pipeline and I turned around to go back home to the left but they didn’t want me anymore because I had dared to even look the other direction for awhile.
I’ve seen it happen to friends and family as well. I still talk to them, but man… I wish the left would stop shoving people out when they could be allies.
people on the left tend to violently push me away when we disagree on something where as the right tends to go “yeah I disagree with you, but you can hang out here if you want”.
:-/
Conservative: I have been censored for my conservative views
Me: Holy shit! You were censored for wanting lower taxes?
Con: LOL no…no not those views
Me: So…deregulation?
Con: Haha no not those views either
Me: Which views, exactly?
Con: Oh, you know the ones
Cool fake conversation, lol.
Though I can say from experience, you will get abundant flak on Lemmy for even suggesting that maybe the US government has a bigger problem with poorly spending the taxes it already receives, than with not raising enough tax revenue.
My guy, put down the Ayn Rand and come up for air.
Keeping up the streak of making random shit up about people, I see, lol.
If it’s the “online” left then I think it’s the “online” part that’s mostly the problem. People tend to be serious assholes when the interaction is distant and you’re just an “other.” Left, right, or center, too many people are comfortable with being insufferable cunts with no respect online. :(
Or maybe people are just sick of coddling fascism enablers and giving them the benefit of the doubt when they just keep proving over and over that they don’t deserve it… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I am deeply interested in immediately exemplifying exactly the sort of behavior you just described
The constant purity testing on the left is real. As well as relentless and obnoxious. It seems like that side is the undisputed champion of making perfect the enemy of good.
I’ve been told I made people in a left-wing friend’s group chat feel, and I quote, “unsafe” when I casually suggested being careful not to overfocus on self-labeling oneself, that it’s important to remember you’re an individual who’s more than a laundry list of categories.
Unsafe? Really? lol
Constantly infighting. I swear the Democrats do more damage to themselves than the Republicans could ever hope to achieve. It’s actually nuts.
“How about just a little genocide?”
You’re not morally superior for picking complete annihilation over drawn out conflict. You’ve only increased the blood on your hands.
Neat.
Looks like the real problem here might be simpletons who believe in a good place and a bad place. They are so busy thinking about silly useless things that they don’t bother with where they are at right now. How many people are harmed daily by useless myths? Such as a place called hell which was a garbage dump in ancient israel before they abandoned it or a being who judges you there.
Remember kids get radicalized or you’ll go to hell.
You don’t have to be a radical to support progressive reform. If anything, a lot of Radicals believe the “both sides bad” flavor of Centrism.
How dare you not be an extremist!
Antifascism is not an extreme position
The correct answer/opinion is not always the middle of two “extreme” options. Thinking so is fallacious.
Abolition was “extreme” during the time of slavery.
“Jesus christ, that’s the shit you got me on?”
*Scribbles “lord’s name in vain” on list
I have to say, growing up very left wing, I find myself taking a left leaning but centrist attitude to a fair few topics as I age.
Honestly, a big part of it is the lack of planning and delusional thought tank of the left. The right is far worse and I certainly don’t agree with them, but I disagree with the OP and a lot of the general sentiment in the comments.
The world isn’t black and white, you cannot be sensibly left or right for every political topic. You need to assess what’s best for everyone. Politics has become like UK football hooliganism, you’re either with or against and anyone on the other side apparently needs their heads kicked in.
You need to assess what’s best for everyone.
Here’s a news flash: both republicans AND democrats want what’s best for capitalists and capitalism.
Capitalism by default, requires the large scale oppression of people to function, and will always, again by default, decay in to fascism.
Pretending as if there is some sort of middle ground between them (the right), and leftists, who oppose both capitalism and the state that upholds it, demonstrates at best a complete misunderstanding of the concepts at hand, or at worst, an unflinching support of capitalism and all its ills, and with it the support for all of the oppression it creates to exist.
Accepting that getting more conservative as you age is normal is just an admission that you’re fine with being the next generation’s “boomer” equivalent.
Life isn’t black and white, but some things in life can be. E.g. when someone gets on TV to talk about the risks of climate change and the station puts them next to another talking head who shares their own alternative facts disputing it, there’s no “middle ground” that is somehow more correct. There’s a factually correct take and there’s politicized bullshit.
Disagree with your first sentence entirely.
I didn’t admit it’s normal, I said it has happened to me. You’re proving my point entirely with these generalised sweeping statements, telling me who I am and what I’m fine with.
I agree somewhat with your second paragraph but I don’t really know what the point is. I’m not talking about bullshit on TV, I’m talking about real issues affecting populations, are not black and white.
Fuck off somewhere and reassess yourself.
Could you please give an example of a policy that you’re centrist on?
Random off the top of my head thought I had a disagreement with someone the other day.
Climate protestors, like the ones blocking roads etc.
I fully support their right to do it. I agree with their message but dislike how they conduct themselves. I fully support the right of the people in the car to lose their shit and pull them off the road. I also think the cops have a right to arrest someone blocking traffic and refusing to move as well as the person who assaulted the protestor.
I do not believe the police should have powers to arrest for planning a protest. Premeditated protesting being a crime is a fucking joke.
So there’s a snapshot of my mind. Complicated issue and I see it from most people’s side. Actions have consequences.
You’re talking to a bunch of Americans. Their democrats are centre-right and their republicans are further right, so a centrist over there is just right-wing.
I also consider myself mostly left leaning, but I’m a bit centrist on a few issues.Eg; I 100% support gay marriage and voted yes in my country’s referendum, but I don’t think all religious people should be forced to do gay weddings.
I recognise that’s a slippery slope which could lead to exclusion, but forcing somebody who despises you to do your wedding doesn’t seem like a good idea for anyone involved.Well I don’t think I should have to pander my language to one country, I’m not American and am not speaking in relation to their politics specifically.
But the rest, 100% agree
You sound more right wing than American Democrats hun.
Please explain to me how voting to support gay marriage, while not forcing people to go against their religious beliefs is right wing?
I’m of the opinion that the government shouldn’t be allowed to force people to do anything, and they shouldn’t be able to deny people from doing anything that doesn’t harm or impact anyone else.I totally support trans rights, because the government shouldn’t be able to decide what you do with your own body.
I support abortion for any reason, because you shouldn’t be forced to raise a child if you aren’t 100% prepared to.
I think all teenagers should have access to puberty blockers if they desire, because it’s not the government’s business. If they’re concerned about teenagers not being mature enough to decide to transition, you should at least set them up with the tools necessary to make that decision further down the line.
All doctors should be forced to provide the appropriate medical attention for trans people, regardless of their beliefs, because healthcare is 100% necessary for everyone and should have no biases or politics.
But marriage ceremonies don’t need to be performed by devout catholics/christians/whatever.
There can be marriage ceremonies held by atheists, agnostics, or people of any religion. So there’s no need to force overly religious people who disagree with it into performing the ceremonies.
You’re forcing them to give up their beliefs (however stupid they may be) when it isn’t necessary.Supporting trans rights, while still also supporting a government that oppresses trans people, is enabling that oppression.
No shit.
If I was American, there’s no way I’d be voting for anything right of the democrats because the democrats are already centre-right in many areas.
What part of this do you think American Democrats disagree with?
No idea, I never said the democrats disagreed with any of that.
I was asking why you think I sound more right wing than democrats.If you want me to come up with things that make the democrats look right-wing, look at healthcare and education.
What? The fact that most Democrats want healthcare for all and free education for all is right wing?
Is that really what they want though? I mean, they might say they do, but they just had a full four years in office and medication still costs ~10x more than it does where I live.
If you broke your arm, how much would the hospital bill set you back?
In my country, it costs $0. The leading centre-left and centre-right parties both support this, despite being political opponents.
Yet your supposed leftist party doesn’t appear to have done much more than talk about it.
Democrats are certainly very left wing in comparison to republicans, but not on a global political scale.
Letting perfect be the enemy of the good enables fascism.
good is when genocide got it
Ah, yes, the centrist’s mantra… 🙄
Is centrism the word fascists from both parties are using to get you to line up and vote for the destruction of our republic? “Don’t blame me, I voted for kodos!”
Felt a little called out?
Center means you think both red & blue are fucking lunatics.
Thinking both sides are lunatics and you have the only rational take can also be a symptom of being an edgelord.
Yup and neither side can stand that position. I don’t enable either side but they are still at it.
