this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
873 points (97.1% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

35208 readers
3562 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bahnd@lemmy.world 17 points 22 hours ago (2 children)
The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

Douglas Adams

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 12 hours ago

So fucking hard to read that first one

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 6 points 21 hours ago

While the discordant text color makes that a little like reading while driving down a road with potholes, Adams is correct.

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

On the one hand yeah sure, but on the other hand in the USA youre an accomplice if you didnt vote or if you wasted your vote on a 3rd party.

Vote for baddy, your fault. Vote for less baddy, youre propping up the system. Vote for good guy, you wasted your chance to vote against baddy. Dont vote, you wasted your chance yo vote against baddy.

Everyone gets the boot on the neck, everyone gets the blame, there are no winners

[–] NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The US has needed rank choice voting since Nixon at least.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 4 points 15 hours ago

I bet that's also roughly the time that some higher ups in that party realized it must never be allowed to happen.

[–] balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 21 hours ago

That's the point, wanting to be elected is disqualifying for getting elected.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works -2 points 13 hours ago

Can you stop with the whole, "if democrats would a won everything would be fine" bullshit?

[–] hark@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago (4 children)

In 2016 both Hillary and Trump had a lower than 50% approval rating and yet they were the frontrunners: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/

Congress has a less than 50% approval rating and it's made up of elected politicians: https://www.statista.com/statistics/207579/public-approval-rating-of-the-us-congress/

We don't have a democracy, we have a system where you can only choose which representative for billionaires you dislike the least. They're all corrupt, any that aren't are quickly drowned out by well-funded opposition.

[–] KombatWombat@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

People tend to approve of their own representatives, and blame others in Congress for unsolved issues. We have become good at identifying problems while minimizing our own contributions to them. And in general, as a country we are very divided on the way things should be changing.

For presidential candidates especially, I've found people tend to latch on to reasons to dislike someone and ignore positive things, except perhaps for their favorite candidate. It's a form of tribalism. But from what I remember Trump and Hilary were both considered distinctly weak candidates at the time.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 points 15 hours ago

Hilary [...] considered distinctly weak

Not by the same proto blumaga libs who insisted Biden and Harris were strong candidates. If you pointed out people were suffering and her policies and messaging was "get a high paying job lmao", you got bombarded with "sHE iS ThE mOsT qUaLiFiEd cAnDiDAtE iN hIsToRy".

[–] frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I believe that’s an overstatement, not all politicians are corrupt. There are many members of Congress that are working to make things better and pass progressive legislation. AOC and Bernie for instance haven’t been silenced and replaced by big corporations.

I agree with you that the US’ federal Congress is more pro-billionaire, but there are still people that want to make things better. The issue is that those people do not have the votes to pass progressive legislation. Lots of people are seemingly happy with the status quo given that half of the states predominantly vote Republican each election cycle.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The non-corrupt ones are a tiny minority and get drowned out by well-funded opposition. If the tide even hints at turning then the billionaires turn to straight-up fascism, as we're seeing now.

[–] frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 19 minutes ago)

I wouldn’t say they’re necessarily tiny but they are a minority by far. 94/213 of the Democrats in the House are part of the progressive caucus for instance, which is 94/435 total seats in the House. Having 1/100 of the seats in the Senate by comparison.

Imo they just do what they can get away with. Which will continue for the foreseeable next three years at minimum.

For progressive change, it really needs to happen at the state level within Blue states. We need those programs passed at the state level and then we can sell how successful they are to the other states.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ExtremeDullard@piefed.social 59 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (12 children)

That's what I keep saying: Trump isn't the problem, he's a symptom.

And the disease is that a majority of voting Americans are either morally bankrupt and gullible enough to overlook all that Trump did and said and elect him, or actively fascist.

And that's why, when people tell me I need to "make space" for those people and give them an exit ramp, so that when Trump finally turns on them too, and they realize what they done did, the nation can heal and come back together, I say: fuck this shit.

I don't want to make space for immoral morons and fascists. These people deserve what they're about to get, and what they've inflicted on the rest of us who didn't sell out, and they'll never come back from the moral quagmire that made them think it's a-okay to elect a fascist POTUS.

[–] bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 hours ago

They tell you to "make space"? What's that even supposed to mean?

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

Make space if they actually repent for real, because it would be stupid not to. That's an ally.

Do not make space if it's not genuine, because it would be stupid to.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 35 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Trump isn’t the problem, he’s a symptom.

The problem is America , systemically not socially. The idiot Trump voters are likewise symptoms.

The sad part is many Americans simply think if you just get rid of Trump and his supporters that it would fix the problems with the country when in reality it perpetuates them by ignoring the underlying issues.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Aneb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

My mom voted for Trump and her gov job is abt to be furloughed

[–] NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I think the argument to make space for them is more practical than compassionate. WTF are we going to do if we just refuse to speak to or have any dealings with 1/3 of the working age population. Are we relocating all Trump voters South of Virginia and splitting the Union here?

Setting aside our own authoritarian problems for a second, if you want to have a wealthy country that can oppose authoritarian regimes (like China and Russia), you need all 350 million of us. (And you need Europe, India, and democratic Asia on board, perhaps even some middle eastern countries, all people you may have philosophical differences with that you have to learn to work with).

[–] frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Even authoritarian governments can be swayed when money is on the line, imo. If countries enforce standards via an international trade deal, anyone that doesn’t play ball by the rules could be incentivized to change if they want a cut of the pie.

Take non-ethical working conditions for example. If every country said they will not do business with a country that doesn’t implement ethical working standards then that country could be incentivized to change. If there was a requirement for third party auditors to be able to regularly verify that those standards are being upheld then that could help ensure that those basic standards are being met even in authoritarian countries.

[–] NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, but whether you're talking about military might or economic might, more people is more leverage. That was my point.

[–] frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 1 points 21 hours ago

I agree, that’s why I feel that having more countries willing to stand together on certain points matters as well. The more people coming together to say something and stand by that, the more that message gets through, even to those that have selfish goals.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] mandatstory@lemmy.world -1 points 13 hours ago

Yeah this is true of Tim Walz he approved 6700.1600.1.K that literally funds Nazi terrorists because a pedophile prostituter Jason Eichorn wrote it and he is stupid, so I showed proof his employees also committed the largest 7 million person data breach bigger than his state and he sat on it since January 2024 since I directly told him, after already telling who I was supposed to, he allows it the entire time because he runs a carceral state and is an actual fascist pig because he allowed them to violate my human rights and everything that happened has been for the better despite all the destruction at least a moron isn't in charge then the historic house would collapse!

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

This includes people who give everyone shit for not voting for the “lesser” corruption. Accomplices all.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 36 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Never ask a man his salary

Never ask a woman her age

Never ask what George Orwell was doing in Myanmar in the 1920s

[–] Velypso@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

He literally wrote a novel that was heavily inspired about his time in Myanmar.

You can kinda ask him yourself.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 day ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burmese_Days

Set in British Burma during the waning days of empire, when Burma was ruled from Delhi as part of British India, the novel serves as "a portrait of the dark side of the British Raj." At the centre of the novel is John Flory, "the lone and lacking individual trapped within a bigger system that is undermining the better side of human nature."[1] The novel describes "both indigenous corruption and imperial bigotry" in a society where, "after all, natives were natives—interesting, no doubt, but finally...an inferior people".[2]

To be clear, that last bit of that last sentence is meant to be read as hideously haughty and privileged... it is dripping with irony, a self-cariacature, as the novel showcases the craven nature of characters in all kinds of social positions, from all kinds of ethnic backgrounds.

The whole thing is meant as an unflinching critique of how colonialism ruins everyone involved.


I guess we could also maybe ask Orwell what he was doing in Spain in the 1930s, but at the time, he would again have difficulty telling you.

Turns out that when you join an internationalist anti fascist militia to go personally shoot fascists yourself, well, sometimes they shoot back, and sometimes they hit you in the neck.

... thankfully, writing exists.

I find it absolutely incredible that George Orwell, a man who has likely personally shot more fascists than probably anyone you'll find on the internet... somehow doesn't clear the ideological purity test these days.

And that is because Orwell, while literally shooting at fascists in Spain, also found himself as the target of a pro-Soviet, pro-Stalin smear campaign, which tried to paint him and his outfit as Trotskyists and also as fascists.

Apparently, this smear campaign remains quite influential, to this day.

[–] anus@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Orwell wrote openly about the things he did throughout his life, both in casual letters and widely read short stories

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Kind of? Many of them, if not most, are also victims of the same system that indoctrinated them. Like an awful, evil feedback loop of victimization.

Not to say that makes it okay ofc, but all people are fallible and all can be cast as fools under the right circumstances, which is just a very important thing to remember at times like these.

[–] KombatWombat@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, I view them as catspaws. They are assisting someone working against their interests without understanding how they are being used. You can show sympathy for them while nonetheless opposing them.

And you're right that everyone should have the humility to accept they also sabotage themselves sometimes. But electing who will lead the country is high stakes and some accountability is fair.

[–] kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

I didn't mean to insinuate that anybody should not be held accountable for their actions. Just the opposite is how I feel, really. But I also believe that many of them can do and learn better if provided with the right care and resources. That's not to say I know how to make that work, but that there is always, always, always a better path forward if enough qualified and caring people put their heads together and make it happen.

Very few of us are truly and entirely irredeemable. Some just take a lot more resources and time to be redeemed than others, is how I see it. I believe it is worth it, for the sake of all of our futures as well as those of people yet to be born, to try and see to it that paths like this are taken and doubled down on as soon as is possible.

Despite being a fan of Orwell's and, more often than not, in agreement with the views he shared, I took his wording to be a bit too absolutist for my tastes on this quote. Understandably, given what we know of his lived experience, but still. There is always a better way as long as there are still people trying to find it. I don't believe in all of us, but I do believe in the capital 'u' Us, you know?

And I'm not familiar with the term "catspaws". Feel like teaching a stranger something new?

[–] KombatWombat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Well said. To be clear, I agree with your outlook on human nature, but I try to check myself on not being optimistic to the point of ignoring people's history. People do change, but we can't presume in which direction that will be. We must remember improvement is a hope and a genuine possibility, but not an expectation. On the other hand, Orwell is regarded as insightful for good reason but of course he is also very cynical about people and the future.

A catspaw is just a term for someone who is used as a tool of another to their detriment. It comes from a French fable where a monkey convinces a cat to grab some roasting chestnuts for them to eat, but the monkey eats them all while the cat ends up burning its paw.

Edit: This is the fable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monkey_and_the_Cat

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In some cases.

In other

[–] MrSmiley@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 day ago

“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

—Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951).

load more comments
view more: next ›