this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024

893 points (96.2% liked)

solarpunk memes

2902 readers

913 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

ex_06

tsugu

Track_Shovel

893

unironically. yes. demand your government work for you. (slrpnk.net)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by stabby_cicada to c/memes

92 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 111 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I gotta agree with cartoon Bernie on this one. Here in Utah the three big concerns of our upcoming legislative session are: how to ban more transgender people from public restrooms, how to prosecute women who may have had an abortion at anytime in the past, and how to ensure colleges and universities can no longer encourage diversity, equity, or inclusion under criminal penalty. I'm not joking, those are the main focuses of the upcoming session.

Never mind that homelessness is out of control, housing prices are through the roof, drug addiction is at an all time high, and the great Salt lake is now nothing but a mud puddle that will dry up in five years' time.

More important to score political points with your witless white-ass cronies and mormon shit heads.

[–] shiveyarbles@beehaw.org 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I feel like Republicans have been grooming Americans into slack jawed cultists with their war against, education, books, cultural diversity, etc. the government is a sad clown show

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 4 points 10 months ago

It's so odd we have a march today (MLK day) for "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion," while last week our Utah Governor called "equity and diversity the most evil concepts mankind can indulge in." And now Utah colleges are forbidden to allow any diversity in hiring.

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Mormons also believe horses existed in North America prior to the Spanish bringing them over. All because a dude who wanted to marry his adopted daughter made some shit up about some golden plates.

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The whole Mormon religion is as baseless and nonsensical as a Dr. Seuss story, only more silly. And it's really just a big business, it rakes in money from idiots dumb enough to give up 10% of their income to a cult. I keep telling them, I'm willing to do it for less - all I ask if 5% of your income and you can TA DA suddenly have eternal salvation, and more underage kids to fuck than a weekend with Jeff Dahmer. (!)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Kase@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

how to ensure colleges and universities can no longer encourage diversity, equity, or inclusion under criminal penalty

Just wanted to note, Oklahoma just passed a similar law (this link is to a news article, which includes a link to the bill itself).

One thing that's crazy to me is when they go on about how much money universities are spending on these programs, when here in Oklahoma it's 0.29% of all higher education spending and 0.11% of state expenditures on higher education.

Shit sucks right now, and I dunno where my home state is headed. It's hard to tell if things will get better or worse in the long run.

Whatever the case, stay strong over there. o7

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 76 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Seriously, what's the point of government if not to HELP US. We didn't invent government to make our lives more difficult. We invented it to keep our shit together. For us. As a property of its existence.

[–] Johanno@feddit.de 10 points 10 months ago

Only if you hold them accountable for what they do.

[–] fosforus@sopuli.xyz 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Seriously, what’s the point of government if not to HELP US.

We would get surprisingly far if we got to a place where the government didn't actively hinder us.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Hinder us how?

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 20 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Off the top of my head:

removing school lunch programs
removing women's reproductive rights
dragging feet on legalizing marijuana
gerrymandering certain states/districts to keep one party in power
politicians being bought by the highest corporate bidder

Those are all pretty big ways in which the government hinders the population at large.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 59 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Wasn't JFKs speech supposed to be about not seeing a community only for what you get out of it?

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 75 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Do you understand how offensive that concept is to a market capitalist?

They don't even want to fund public schools, and they get a pre-literate workforce out of that.

"Whats in it for me" would be our national slogan, if it wasn't already "fuck you whether or not I got mine."

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 10 months ago

That might be what the speech meant in context, but the quote alone sounds like something Animal Farm's Napoleon would say to Boxer.

[–] Rooskie91@discuss.online 39 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (10 children)

American's vote for the government and fund it with their taxes. To believe it's a system with any other purpose than to serve it's citizens is assenine.

load more comments (10 replies)

[–] butt_mountain_69420@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If they're going to steal 30%+ of my income, I expect something more than a DC pedo party and constant war.

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

I keep telling people, I'll do it for less. Give me just 5% of your income and I'll be happy to fuck you over with inane laws and restrictions, plus I'll let you believe you're going to become a god in the afterlife and have a harem of however many underage kids you want to screw for eternity.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

it's supposed to be ironic ?

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I think so.

That Kennedy quote has always been a puzzler.

Not in meaning, but why the hell it's supposed to be some kind of American ideal to aspire to.

"Take what we give you and beg to serve" seems a more honest phrasing.

[–] Sagifurius@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago

It's more about helping your fellow man, not the government.

[–] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

You rarely see any thing else from that speech. If they'd just show even the part right after the "ask not" part it would help.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

-JFK Inaugural Address, January 20, 1961

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

Ok but also remember that Kennedy was demanding Americans accept responsibility for those less fortunate among us and that we invest in our future

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 14 points 10 months ago

I do in fact demand better of my government.

[–] Rottcodd@kbin.social 13 points 10 months ago

Unironically yes.

It's not an issue of whether or not the government will work for the advantage ofone group of people - it WILL work for the advantage of one group of people. It can't help but. It can't do literally everything - it has to pick and choose specific things. And each of those specific things will, if it provides benefit at all, only provide that benefit for some.

So the issue is merely who is going to benefit.

And the only way for we the people to benefit, as opposed to a handful of wealthy and powerful fuckwads benefitting, is if we the people demand that we're the ones who benefit - if we insist, "No - fuck you - this is our government spending our tax revenue and it's fucking well going to spend it on us!"

[–] CaptainProton@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Governments who do not fear their people have no reason to maintain a culture of obeying their wishes.

You can demand it, but when your election options are all determined by insiders and you further contribute by treating 3rd parties like laughing stock, you've got nothing but some weak whatever's left of a second amendment to hold over them.

[–] AMillionNames@sh.itjust.works 7 points 10 months ago

That's crazy talk. You'd have to have some crazy government where you only get to vote every couple of years for one of only two candidates where the only reason to vote for one of them would be to not vote for the other guy for something like that to happen.

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 7 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Bernie’s not a socialist.

[–] bort@feddit.de 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

elabtorate?

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Soc dem at best.

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (5 children)

First of all, social democrat doesn't mean "watered down socialist". It means a socialist who favors a democratic electoral structure.

Second, these aren't tiers. If soc dem was somehow "less socialist" than "socialist" (it isn't, see above), it would still not be "worse", just a different set of values.

[–] nihth@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Social Democrat (which I think is what Bernie is closest to) is not socialist, it is the variant of capitalism used in many European countries (not limited to) like the Scandinavian countries. Democratic socialist is socialist

Edit: they sound similar but are really not

[–] Tatar_Nobility@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago

The term “social democracy” is very deceiving nowadays since it does not pertain anymore to the roots of the ideology which has changed quite drastically in the last century.

The original premise was that socialism could be achieved through reform and not revolution (hence it parted ways with the Marxist position). That is, the State's institutions were suitable enough to “eventually” or “some day” lead to a socialist mode of production, and so cooperation with the state and, by extension, the bourgeoisie were incremental for socialism. This is why socdem parties were firm believers that change comes from the parliamentary electoral structure (Esson, 2022). I am not going to argue why this is problematic—Marx and Engels have said enough regarding this.

However, social democracy as we know it in the modern age is vastly different from what it used to be. The ideology in the 70's has become attached to the Third Way and socdem parties throughout the world gradually adopted neoliberal policies, pressured by electoral competition. And the Scandinavian countries, home of social democracy, are an exemplary case to this. Just compare their parties' agenda before and after WW2 and you will see what I am talking about.

To refer to “social democracy” as anything less than capitalism would be factually fallacious.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago

Not quite true. SocDem means a Social Democrat, ie a Capitalist in favor of strong social safety nets. Social Democrats are not Socialists, and the Nordic Countries are perfect examples of Social Democracies. They have high Unionization, generous social safety nets, and rely on Capitalism as their mode of production.

You're confusing Social Democrats with Democratic Socialists. Democratic Socialists are generally Socialists who favor liberal democracy over Democratic Centralism, Anarchism, Direct Democracy, Soviet Democracy, or any other form of Democracy. Think America, but when Workers own the Means of Production. They also tend to be more in favor of reform over revolution, though not necessarily.

I agree that there aren't tiers of Socialism, either Workers own the Means of Production or they don't, but I had to correct the bit on Social Democracy.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] theodewere@kbin.social 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

elect nerds to public office.. nerds work hard and balance books..

[–] Raz@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Bold of you to assume there's no socio- or psychopaths among nerds. Just look at the tech industry C-suite.

[–] Zoboomafoo 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Do you have a point, or did you just want to disagree with someone?

[–] Raz@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

My point was: There's plenty of nerds who can be(come) just as corrupt or selfish as any politician. They also don't necessarily work harder.

I would like some more tech literacy in politics though.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Ask not what you can do for you country; we will be the ones asking the questions here. Your country will tell you what to do and either you will obey or there will be consequences, because the revolution was a lie and you are a fool.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments