this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2025
317 points (80.8% liked)

Flippanarchy

1632 readers
411 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

All I will say is that it’s instantly objectively verifiable that I never repeatedly claimed I wasn’t a liberal, and now you said I did. You are lying so that you will get approval from your echo chamber.

I love this 'i never said those words' game we've been playing, but i wasn't quoting you as making that claim, only that you were insisting that my definition of liberal definitely doesn't apply to you. The deeper I went into explaining the specific part of liberalism you were dancing around that I took issue with, the greater effort you went to either misunderstand my description to paint yourself out of the picture, or quote yourself talking about a specific issue you held that was undermined in all of your other comment history. I tried telling you repeatedly that it isn't about a specific policy position or opinion, it's the way in which liberals abandon those positions when forced to choose between them or their institutions.

You’re also misrepresenting tons of stuff that I believe or have said

Right, like you've been misrepresenting things i've never said? Like:

  • 'liberals oppose strikes'

  • 'it seems like your whole concept of it is as a limiting factor on progressive movements'

  • 'you’re defining liberalism as “allegiance to the government and rejection of methods of change outside of the formal government structure,” and kind of nothing else beyond that'

I'm not ascribing things you say to you, I'm interpreting your behavior through a liberal lens in an effort to give you examples for how you might fall into that category. Do liberals oppose protests? Decidedly not. Do they abandon their support for protest when those protests materially threaten the institutions they're protecting? Resoundingly, yes. You're 'fine' with the undecided movement, but make big time noise about people choosing not to vote as a result of those protests, even though that protest and every other always has the same implicit threat. It isn't the fault of protestors or online agitators for souring the enthusiasm for democratic candidates, and it isn't even the non-voter's fault for seeing the lack of response to those protests and deciding that democrats aren't worth the trouble. Democrats had an opportunity to address those concerns for more than a year before 2024, and they turned their back on their base at every turn. You might think non-voters are responsible for that loss, but it's still the democrats' fault for abandoning them.

Ultimately it doesn't matter what you think. You're right - I am absolutely in good company here.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Posted a reply in !deleted@quokk.au, since some of what I had to say about voting is forbidden to say here. Up to you whether you want to restart a long discussion about it.

[–] anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Hmm, can't see anything on my end.

I'm not really interested in re-litigating this anyway.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@quokk.au 1 points 9 hours ago

Yeah, probably federation issues for a brand new community. No worries, you do you.