The LGBTQ does not steal your money, they steal your sex!
"If two men or two women can form a household based on an equal separation of responsibilities and reliance on one another, how am I gonna convince my wife God wants her to do the dishes while I drink beer and yell?"
You went wrong at "convincing". Send it, hope for the best ;)
Dang LGBTQ came by and turned me gay. Now I can't stop fantasizing over other women! I mean, gestures wildly up and down
That's fine. I'm not using it right now anyway.
I knew it!
They don't want your money, honey, they want your love
Aw, that's lovely 🥰
True story, the US is a state founded by immigrants.
If anything that's an argument against immigration, considering what happened to the people that lived there before
Too bad the US is not what the natives made it to be 🤷... they didn't like what the immigrants did, but money is a very powerful thing.
Well as long as they promise not to systematically murder us with vastly superior technology
no no, I'm not the child of immigrants! I'm iTaLiAn AmeRiCan, gosh.
/s
Illegal immigrants, no less.
And before the decade-long process of today, even the legal immigrants had it way easier.
Want to be an American? Great*, get on a boat, avoid icebergs, get off the boat at a port of entry, and talk to someone who will misspell your name.
Immigrants. I always knew it was them. Even when it was the bears, I knew it was them
I'd like to buy your rock
I read "cock" 💀
Settle down, chairman moe! But, just to nitpick, what he says sounds a lot more like "immigants" to me. Which when I originally saw the scene, was the icing on the cake.
Immigrants? So elongated muskrat?
Exactly. normally when we think "immigrants" we think of the peniless illegal people who crawl under the fence or swim around it. No. The real enemy immigrants are the wealthies.
Especially the ones buying up all our real estate so houses sit empty and cost too much for anyone to live in them.
Is this loss
this is a both-sides argument, and therefore wrong.
because i can convey my point in a short phrase, i am therefore the winner.
Louis Armstrong with his brother Lance Armstrong back in 89 both went to the moon. All so you could have smaller computers and political posts like this :/
I removed and moan as much as the next bloke, but yeah that comment hit me right in the soul (assuming I have one).
so many things wrong here:
lois armstrong played the trombone
lance armstrong's real name is buzz aldrin
it was '69, not '98
the moon landing was in no way politicized
i am not using a computer, but a phone
When are we gonna stop demonizing the other half of population, start understanding they may be right right at something and I may not be right about everything. People unite 🤝
"See we should all just come together and agree to believe what I believe. You should just accept that sometimes you're wrong, even though I haven't presented any evidence. If we agreed, we wouldn't be fighting; therefore the charitable thing for you to do is to cause us to agree by changing your opinion to match mine"
I think once ppl unite we'll find out we need no old guy in a suit telling us what's the right thing to do for 4 years long and begin working on a parlament were truly wise individuals have their voice and a wide variety of professors are finnally listened. But we are too many to fit in a proportionally representative parlament and the only solution I see is dissolution of all big states into county governments and form only temporary intercity alliances.
Either say something that means anything or go back to Facebook.
People prefer circlejerking instead of trying to understand each other.
If that's what you think this says, then you completely misunderstand anarchism.
This book describes current and past societies that have functioned using anarchist principles such as horizontality, mutual aid, none of which are utopian, but all of which are significantly more equitable than systems like capitalism, feudalism, authoritarianism, and statehood.
Thank you for the link! AnarchistLibrary is cool but sometimes it's hard to find the solid stuff from the tumblr rants.
I agree, it's amazing how "revolutionary" it is to hold the idea that people can lead and cooperate just fine without a someone "on top" making all the rules everyone just follows because they say so. Some people just can't fathom not being lead around by the nose.
They think we're utopian, but I'd rather work towards an equitable world using anarchist principles, knowing it won't create a utopia, than give up and let greed and hatred win out because that's the status quo.
"This current situation is the best we've got so far" is such a low bar.
Amen. One of the things I like best about anarchism is it introduces concepts that we can begin to practice immediately vs. awaiting some future revolution.
I really like the book I linked because to me it's so much easier to read and digest than some of the famous works by authors like Kropotkin or Goldman.
My ex-wife liked to practice horizontality with everyone she met.
I, too, choose to practice horizontality with SatansMaggotyCumFart's wife
Ex-wife.
Very important distinction.
Ayyyyy
Democratically owning the means of production among the workers. Instead of some greedy rich guy who'd want to give as little of the profit as possible to the people actually making the product or providing the service.
See, that works for a farm.
I don't see how it works for a $40 billion chip fabrication plant.
Work isn't just physical you know. Management, planning, etc is work too, and they'd get paid according to how many want to do them, and how hard they are.
The difference is, like I said, that some greedy rich bastard who’d want to give as little of the profit as possible to the people actually making the product or providing the service wouldn't own that means of production.
Simple. You know all those scientists that work at $40 billion chip plants? They would actually take the $40 billion and not some random suit who doesn't do any of the actual work. Executive leadership is important, but it's not worth 1000x the average worker's salary.
So who builds it? Do you just get together with 40,000 of your friends and go "hey if everyone here chips in a million, we can compete with TSMC"?
Organizing it through a Socialist government would probably be the easiest.
And complaining about such a tiny challenge is hilarious lmao
Oh no, a challenge. Let's not even try.
There are examples of exactly this occuring regarding renewables, there are community funded battery/solar farms here in Aus.
If it can be done on that scale, it can definitely be scaled up, it's just a matter of willingness of the community.
You mean capitalist cooperatives? They exist and even Milei wants to turn Aerolíneas Argentinas into one
Co-ops and unions are certainly steps in the right direction, but they're more like temporary band-aids over Capitalism instead of implementing proper Socialism.
Because proper socialism always devolves into tyranny
As capitalism is currently doing...
Source?
[gestures wildly at everything]
Strawman.
People always say this and then fail to provide a single example of when proper socialism existed and then destroyed the country.
"This theory when applied didn't end like in the book, therefore it's not really that theory"
Communism without actually sharing isn't communism. Democracy without fair elections isn't democracy. Socialism without the socialisation of the benefit of production is not socialism. Your ignorance of these things doesn't change what they are.
Again, the "the theory when applied doesn't look like in the book so it's not real communism"
No. The theory when applied doesn't follow the book. The difference is something called contextual nuance, and you have no grasp of it.
Your position is like North Korea claiming democracy doesn't work because they say they are one and it's not working.
The theory when applied ends up not following the book... I wonder why?
The theory when applied ends up not following the book... I wonder why?
Because you can't read, as proven.
The difference is something called contextual nuance, and you have no grasp of it.
Your position is like North Korea claiming democracy doesn't work because they say they are one and it's not working.
You can continue acting stupid, but in your case I'm not sure it's an act.
No, it's not a democracy because it doesn't even bother following actual democratic principles. It's just like Napoleon's idea of democracy: I am the people, therefore if I have absolute power I'm being democratic.
Basically Cuba on steroids
I copy-pasted my answer because you copy-pasted your comment
The only thing like Napoleon's around here is your ego. Shame you don't have the brains to go with it.
North Korea calls itself democratic. Everyone in the country votes for a new leader every five years. It's just that there's only one name on the ballot.
One would be foolhardy to call that democracy.
One would be even more foolhardy to argue that this means that democracy is a stupid idea.
All while the world's current top superpower is right beside them, sees them as an enemy, and has a still ongoing embargo on them for 60 years now to prevent them from trading with other countries. That'll hopefully change once China's Belt and Road Initiative is complete though.
Clearly this model works. It does require expelling landleeches, plantation owners and billionaires if they don't hand over the means of production to the workers (like Cuba did after the revolution), but I don't think most people would mind that.
It also historically requires fighting off the US though because military, oil, and other private corporation owners can't exploit Socialist countries as much, which is harder.
That first paragraph already proves that you can't be reasoned with
I can't think of anything to refute your comment
So you understand my point. Thanks lol
No, it's just pointless to argue with someone so out of touch with reality he believes Cuba is one of the most democratic countries
It is though? People directly nominate individuals in their area, and the ballots are checked in public where anyone can attend.
This results in a Parliament that evenly and properly represents the entire population. That's why Cuba has an unusually high percentage of women in the government, 53.22% now (U.S has 29.0%), and better LGBT rights than the U.S. nowadays.
Being rich as an advantage is also taken away by banning advertising yourself/anyone. You need social connections with the people in your area (Socialism) instead.
Not knowing something is fine, but being ignorant and arrogant about it is unfortunate. Though I suppose it is unbelievable, if you're in a Capitalist country, to hear that a nation has solved homelessness, starvation, and education by just changing its political/economic system (and fighting off the US after).
Imagine its sheer potential once it can trade with other countries with that massive advantage, after the US is eventually forced to stop the embargo.
You mean the 2021 "protests"? Most of it was pro-government/revolution ones against CIA-backed 'protests' that were spun up by Fox News to be pro-US; by blurring out signs and the like. And a fake Twitter campaign run by bots.
These aren't declassified until decades later for obvious reasons. They're called "color revolutions" and are staged by billion dollar US corporations to set the stage for military or political action. Best way to spot them is seeing if they have US-flags or have signs with generic lines like "Freedom".
That's an oxymoron. There is literally no such thing as a capitalist cooperative. By definition, co-ops are socialist. Also, the right wing populist wants to socialize the airlines?
Yes, he does want to give the airlines to the workers
Also touch some fucking grass to see how agricultural cooperatives work under capitalism
Political comics are hard to critique because people see it as an attack on the message and not the abysmal quality.
Isn't the message the point? Aren't political cartoons historically the epitome of low-brow art? No one here is writing a thesis on Line Thickness and 17th Century Liberalism Themes In Dilbert.
If by 'worst' you mean 'bravest' and 'truest' and 'most important' then I agree
Making fun of rightoids sure is brave on this site...
making fun of the right wing is a victimless crime as they don't believe victims
Making fun of conservatives on a largely liberal-communist website, damn nothing braver than that lol
Aren't liberals and communists bitter enemies?
Sorry I'll try to illustrate this better.
Liberal ----> Communist
As in, anything to the left of conservative which is the majority user base of the lemmy community. Yes I'm aware liberals are capitalists still, don't try to play these stupid games you know what I meant.
I'm not trying to play any stupid games, I'm asking you a question.
No need to get rude about it.
You're asking a question meant to illustrate that I don't know what I'm talking about because you didn't understand my original comment or you are trying to discredit me because you believe I'm conservative. I'm not, I just think the meme itself is derivative and doesn't understand the POV of conservatives. They aren't convinced gay people have all the money, they just hate LGBT people in general because they're bigots and believe the economy is shit for different reasons entirely.
Strawman arguments seem to be a commonality everywhere, it's not really useful outside of circle jerking that you're smart and no one else is.
I think you are overthinking my comment.
I hear what you're saying, but this is why words are so important. They have meaning. Especially political ideologies.
Which is why I said liberal to communist. Moderate left to far left.
The funniest part is how the artist felt the need to write "the left" and "the right" on the characters as if this highly intellectual commentary is too subtle to understand without help. We've reached below the point of crappy editorial cartoons.
It is too subtle to understand. Without the labels, they're just random people and the message is lost. We're not talking about random dumb dumbs that don't understand how Western oligarchies work, we're talking about the conservatives that actively cheer it on.
I think the content is good. The art feels a little rough, not sure if it is a style or not. If the original author is new at this stuff, this is pretty good. Everyone has to start somewhere.
Too bad there is no working class left. The college educated left liked belittling blue collar workers too much.
There's no blue collar worker's because it doesn't pay enough.
Educated people can and should work in blue collar fields, but unfortunately our society bases everything on money, so leaving blue collar work for higher paying jobs is literally the dear and fluffy capitalism you love so much. Anyone with an education is going to seek the highest paying job possible and none of those are blue collar.
"working class" doesn't mean field hands and electricians, it means everyone that isn't a multi millionaire. I work in IT and am still working class, you work blue collar and are working class, the salesman that works for a bank is working class. Unless you're the owner of a business entity and do not have to work to pay your bills, then you're "working class."
The conservative ideology has ground the middle class into non-existence through the deregulation of the market and the abysmal failure of trickle down economics. Compounded by the uselessness of the Democratic party (cause they're all just old money career politicians too, what a surprise) not doing a damn thing when they're in control of the legislative branch. Not because educated people made fun of yokels too much. You're drawing conclusions out of your feelings, not reality.
Bro, there are tens of millions of blue collar workers nationwide, and depending on the trade, pays exceptionally well. Not millionaire well, but well enough to live reasonably comfortably.
Lmfao what?
Everyone on the left is in the ruling class? Whoa! I'm rich!
I bet you felt really smart typing that
I'm so fucking sick and tired of seeing politics everywhere on lemme. You guys are worse than redditors with this shit
I'm sorry people aren't posting content relevant to your personal preferences.
May I suggest you use filters, or perhaps go fuck yourself?
For a laugh, here's what this definitely consistent person with a principled dislike of politics (which definitely isn't just things they disagree with) posted immediately after their complaint:
US fed doesn't recognize basic ethics laws, how unsurprising
A boring dystopia
Based. If you see something you dont like on the fediverse, you can ignore it (like a sane person) or filter it out (also like a sane person).
Ah. So the "left" aren't social left, they just see money as the answer to all social progression too. Got it. Well that explains our current Western progress and predicament. Lot of growing up to do if, as far as social progression goes, money is seen as a power rather than a weakness. Ain't no one in need getting any that way.
History repeats and we all stay the same. New generation, another dollar.
At least "eat the rich" makes more sense. Robin Hood would rob the guy and not socially recognise them as a king. More important things to do.
Edit: I actually expected more down votes than this (7) and was wanting some discourse. Anyone? I'm looking for someone to state what's not already called out in that a core issue is the perception of monetary wealth being a controlling factor of social imbalance—which of course it is with a society of that perception.
You've all got bank accounts drained for the people, not your house deposit, right? Right? Sorry... Left? Left?
The Left: Rich people are the problem
saltesc: So you agree that money is power? Gotcha!
Everyone: What does that even mean?
saltesc: Don't dismiss my word salad without discourse!
Well, actual left doesn't base itself on economical attributes. So it's interesting to see a meme go straight to wealth while claiming leftism. Part of being on the left is recognisimg wealth as a faux controller and issue. Actual left doesn't socially want in on it too. Actual left would aim at rejecting an acknowledgement of wealth by reinforcing services and freedoms to all without requirement of wealth, thus diluting the importance and value of money.
This comic almost opposes that by weighing importance of wealth. It's insulting to leftism by claiming "this is left".
A lot of the replies seem to be the trending American ideas of leftism which are very new and very unique to a $27T GDP with stonks of social issues. Kind of trying to force the two to connect, but that's not how leftism works.
Y'all can literally Google it right now if you need to know what being left is. It's social equality you're meant to be working on, not getting a piece of the pie. Recognising and blaming distribution of wealth is literally opposing leftism because it's acknowledging and giving finance power. The comic is more "I feel left out" when it should be "your money is nothing".
Bro wants to sound important and educated soooo bad. I actually giggled reading "economical attributes". Like I don't think even you understand what you're trying to say.
It's social equality you're meant to be working on, not getting a piece of the pie.
Leftists want this. You're not saying something revolutionary. The problem is that in America, getting democratic socialism with redistribution of wealth is much more realistic than a total social overhaul like you're suggesting.
Recognising and blaming distribution of wealth is literally opposing leftism because it's acknowledging and giving finance power.
Uhhh no. Capitalism and the govt give finance power. Recognizing and attempting to use the system to better the lives of people isn't the problem, it just isn't the ideal solution. It's a stop-gap.
You can claim "true leftism" all day, but I live in reality where half-assed solutions are better than nothing.
TIL criticism of the status quo isn't left. Neither is criticizing power dynamics. It's not about sharing the cake equally but pretending the cake doesn't exist. This will feed the hungry and house the homeless.
Sure, occupying empty houses will house the homeless but only if you are prepared for the power dynamics which is the police will evict you in no time. I wish money was nothing but force ain't nothing and the state has a monopoly on force, so as long as they think money is something, it is. Good luck with your mutual aid initiative or what ever it is you are doing and we can try to change the system, but we can't just ignore it.
States where the society views money as less important than social issues/equality already have and will continue to get progressive social benefits. You can't put a value on something if every expects it to be free. Lack of wealth is not an issue when everyone expects things to be free. But by recognising wealth and pricetags does money become important and thus hoarded. Th cake isn't money, it's cake. You don't need money redistributed for everyone to get cake when cake is expected as a social staple and offset by the society as a whole.
This is fundamental leftism. A society won't achieve it if they're focused on people having more money than them. "But how will I pay for cake if they have all the money?!" Uhhh, you don't. You demand the cake and halt everything until you get the cake. Once everyone has cake, back to business as usual.
I can't recall a single historical social issue that was resolved by acknowledging and redistributing wealth. Enough people just demanded it and social equality happened.
I love how you totally ignore my point. Sure, money isn't the cake, but housing is. Good luck ignoring the cops that evict you!
Sure, I want a classless, moneyless, stateless society but on the way there, we can't ignore what is. I'm not a Marxist but I think we can agree that Marx was left. He wrote a book "Das Kapital". You can literally google what it is about.
I've read plenty of Marx.
I see your point. However, you are still not understanding. Fair housing can't happen if you think it's about distribution of wealth. Stop thinking it's all about money. It's about social equality. The left would introduce rental caps, tenant benefits, rental assistance programs, more rights and benefits to prevent unfair evictions. But also improve housing for renters to have more equal stance to own instead.
This is what left states do. Left is not considering and focusing on redistributing wealth as the centre of social inequality since it is not a social issue. Money comes after. It is a result. If a self-proclaimed "left" is so obsessed with money, I question their concern of actual social equalities because they too are only thinking about the money and there's no resolve in that.
Nobody said it's only about redistributing money. We are talking about a 4 panel meme that says "Rich people are the problem". It's not a manifesto stating that redistribution will solve all our problems. It's a meme saying rich people are the problem. They are the ruling class. Not everything utterance has to have the solution. Sometimes it's enough to state the problem.
I'm full into solving the housing problem by occupying empty houses and self-organized groups around the concept of mutual aid. We need to abolish money and the state and patriarchy but sometimes it's ok to "just" say "rich people are the problem". This doesn't imply that it's the only one and that the solution is easy. It isn't.
Rich people are the by-product of social inequality. The actual problem. Correcting these things would naturally dissolve the power of money since it devalues its place in society as it is less needed for basic social survival.
But in there lies the true issue. If no longer money—an artificial measure of tracking what is valuable in society—what is the next thing the same people will want to control? Our history is riddled with it. That's the tricky part of we abolish money and it does sound awful nice like you say. Gold, water, people, currency, oil... It's always something. But leftism looks to ensure things like this are avoided, not being side-tracked by trying to cure the symptoms. If you are a leftist, people wih absurd control of something (money in this case) are an indicatior equality has been neglected and there's work to do. Step 1, look at what's making them have so much control and start on all of those things. It's not money. Money's not even valuable to many of the left.
I see this comic and I don't see leftism at all. I see someone upset about finance and doesn't know what to do but blame a specific symptom of inequality impacting them. That's not going to do anything and it's not "left". It indicates a value and focus for money that may even see them do the exact same thing if they amassed some, since it's so important to them than much other else in the complexities of society, especially the actual problems causing it.
My triggering issue is it says "this is left" and "this is right" without sensing the irony. The money part is just...so primitive I couldn't help myself. We see things on spectrums with many points peppered across for just a single individual. What upsets me is this primative two camp idea driving "Whatever I don't like must be right/left" without actually understanding what these things are. It's very clear of a naturally divisive society which is a breeding ground for social inequality. It smells distinctly US where almost many things (and historically so) are a really strong competition of one side versus another. Trying to drag leftism into that is actually opposing to its fundamental ideas. Neglecting the spectrum entirely is straight up regressive of social maturity and stability.
I don't think many people on Lemmy actually know what they are except unhappy, and they are looking for comfort and hope in a home. But the principle ideas of leftism do not conduct itself this way, lest it never succeed in progression.
Edit: Also, I appreciate you sticking with me this far :) It's okay if I've been exhausting enough now though. Exchanging thoughts and ideas is super fulfilling and we always get better for it, even if we don't think anything's sticking.
What does your comment mean though? Feel free to attack my reading comprehension but i don't actually think your comment is making a statement. Distill it so my slow ass understands and maybe (and that's a big maybe) we can try to have some sort of conversation. Judging by the downvotes i presume your opinion is unpopular--i just don't understand it well enough to see why.
Judging by the downvotes i presume your opinion is unpopular–i just don’t understand it well enough to see why.
Asked and answered. It's incoherent borderline word salad and just comes across as really really trollish, especially with the edit demanding "discourse."
I think his comment is reading way way too much into it. The comic is basically saying that "left" is willing to question authority, while "right" takes it as gospel and asks for more.
There's also the claim that criticising weath disparity while living in a very weath-centric system is somehow an endorsement of that weath-centric system.
Guy seems to just want to dump on the idea of left, so I'll leave a downvote and let him dump in peace.
You criticise wealth disparity, yet live in a capitalist society. Curious. I am very intelligent.
Thanks for taking the time to break that down for me. I will just go ahead and attack my own reading comprehension--i never would have deduced that from their comment, no way.
Could it also have something to do with the fact that nowadays what's called "the right" in the US are extremists and what's called "the left" are center-right/right wing?
Maybe. Seeing some of the follow up commonts, it feels more like a no true scotsman fallacy.
"You can't be left without being extreme left" "the left doesn't do moderate left things!" "Thinking about money proves you aren't left!"
As if wanting anything less than a money-free socialist utopia yesterday isn't left enough.
Ive made the same errors as @saltesc@lemmy.world before and probably worse. For me it came from a depressed headspace and bad mindset.
My opinion is left and it's annoyed that someone would say the comic is left.
While the comic is focused on distribution and accumulation of wealth being an issue, actual left recognises finance as an issue. Society doesn't require wealth for equality. People can be rich in leftism. Leftism is social. Social issues is what it addresses. Thinking "left" is somehow attached to finance is fundamentally anti-social. Thinking money should be better disteibuted and not hoarded by the rich is acknowledging money is power which is anti-social.
None of us with national healthcare systems got them by considering money and the rich and who has and who doesn't have money. We got them by acknowledging health as a social issue. Money be damned.
None of us with nationally assisted higher education got it by considering money and the rich and who has or doesn't have money. We got it by acknowledging education as a social issue. Money be damned.
None of us that with gun regulation got it by considering money and the rich and who has or doesn't have money. We got them by acknowledging public safety as a social issue. Money be damned.
This comic... "Nah, it's money, hey. That's what's stopping us. I'm left 👉👈" It's kind of insulting to the ideology. And I expected backlash on here because Lemmy seems to be riddled with backseat leftists that don't actually know what it is. By acknowledging money as some big value implies that when it comes time to pay for social equality, Lemmingtons and the author of this comic will be upset to be getting less money. That's not an issue when money takes anback seat to social progression aka actual left.
Wtf are you trying to say
You calling me crazy? Just 'cause I got a hotel in my foot doesn't make me a boogalymoogalymoogaly!
No one knows what you're talking about
Robin Hood liked the king. He was noble himself.
Oh yeah, haha. Prince*
You and all of the new conservative sign ups on Lemmy need to go back to 4chan or Truth and have your circle jerk. Lemmy was safely claimed by leftists. You're gonna have a bad time here.
You're making bold assumptions and trying to place me in a tribe you see the world as—but I'm of none of the things you mentioned nor even close. You feel you can say that without much thought or concern though because you feel as though you're protected in your camp, why would you declare it so loudly that I know where I am? The reality is, your camp is small, one of millions, and insignificant in global society and culture. You also clearly know as much about conservatism as leftism if you think anything of what I said was ideals or association of conservatism. This must be just what you've learned in your camp.
But, hey. You keep fighting that "us vs them"—whoever the fuck they are—thing you got going on. That's the irony of your self-painted banner. It doesn't help the world progress and encourages we remain conservative of its old social ways and setbacks.
Tribalism is for the old, the weak, and a disgrace on what we're supposed to be and could be. The world's long been too small for you to bark like a yard dog and be intolerant of everything that walks by. Maybe it's time you start reading about the things you claim to hold so dearly. Or don't. I'm a 4chan "conservative" after all. Nazi next, hm?
The LGBTQ does not steal your money, they steal your sex!
"If two men or two women can form a household based on an equal separation of responsibilities and reliance on one another, how am I gonna convince my wife God wants her to do the dishes while I drink beer and yell?"
You went wrong at "convincing". Send it, hope for the best ;)
Dang LGBTQ came by and turned me gay. Now I can't stop fantasizing over other women! I mean, gestures wildly up and down
That's fine. I'm not using it right now anyway.
I knew it!
They don't want your money, honey, they want your love
Aw, that's lovely 🥰
True story, the US is a state founded by immigrants.
If anything that's an argument against immigration, considering what happened to the people that lived there before
Too bad the US is not what the natives made it to be 🤷... they didn't like what the immigrants did, but money is a very powerful thing.
Well as long as they promise not to systematically murder us with vastly superior technology
no no, I'm not the child of immigrants! I'm iTaLiAn AmeRiCan, gosh.
/s
Illegal immigrants, no less.
And before the decade-long process of today, even the legal immigrants had it way easier.
Want to be an American? Great*, get on a boat, avoid icebergs, get off the boat at a port of entry, and talk to someone who will misspell your name.
^* ^Experiences ^may ^vary ^based ^on ^the ^foreign ^scapegoat ^at ^the ^time.
Immigrants. I always knew it was them. Even when it was the bears, I knew it was them
I'd like to buy your rock
I read "cock" 💀
Settle down, chairman moe! But, just to nitpick, what he says sounds a lot more like "immigants" to me. Which when I originally saw the scene, was the icing on the cake.
Immigrants? So elongated muskrat?
Exactly. normally when we think "immigrants" we think of the peniless illegal people who crawl under the fence or swim around it. No. The real enemy immigrants are the wealthies.
Especially the ones buying up all our real estate so houses sit empty and cost too much for anyone to live in them.
Is this loss
this is a both-sides argument, and therefore wrong.
because i can convey my point in a short phrase, i am therefore the winner.
knives out
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Second thought made a great video covering the whole thing
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Louis Armstrong with his brother Lance Armstrong back in 89 both went to the moon. All so you could have smaller computers and political posts like this :/
I removed and moan as much as the next bloke, but yeah that comment hit me right in the soul (assuming I have one).
so many things wrong here:
When are we gonna stop demonizing the other half of population, start understanding they may be right right at something and I may not be right about everything. People unite 🤝
"See we should all just come together and agree to believe what I believe. You should just accept that sometimes you're wrong, even though I haven't presented any evidence. If we agreed, we wouldn't be fighting; therefore the charitable thing for you to do is to cause us to agree by changing your opinion to match mine"
I think once ppl unite we'll find out we need no old guy in a suit telling us what's the right thing to do for 4 years long and begin working on a parlament were truly wise individuals have their voice and a wide variety of professors are finnally listened. But we are too many to fit in a proportionally representative parlament and the only solution I see is dissolution of all big states into county governments and form only temporary intercity alliances.
Either say something that means anything or go back to Facebook.
People prefer circlejerking instead of trying to understand each other.
And the solution is?
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works
Bro thinks an utopia will work
If that's what you think this says, then you completely misunderstand anarchism.
This book describes current and past societies that have functioned using anarchist principles such as horizontality, mutual aid, none of which are utopian, but all of which are significantly more equitable than systems like capitalism, feudalism, authoritarianism, and statehood.
Thank you for the link! AnarchistLibrary is cool but sometimes it's hard to find the solid stuff from the tumblr rants.
I agree, it's amazing how "revolutionary" it is to hold the idea that people can lead and cooperate just fine without a someone "on top" making all the rules everyone just follows because they say so. Some people just can't fathom not being lead around by the nose.
They think we're utopian, but I'd rather work towards an equitable world using anarchist principles, knowing it won't create a utopia, than give up and let greed and hatred win out because that's the status quo.
"This current situation is the best we've got so far" is such a low bar.
Amen. One of the things I like best about anarchism is it introduces concepts that we can begin to practice immediately vs. awaiting some future revolution.
I really like the book I linked because to me it's so much easier to read and digest than some of the famous works by authors like Kropotkin or Goldman.
Audible Anarchist has also uploaded a few chapters from the book, which I've been listening to on my walks: https://piped.privacydev.net/channel/UCaO1QA8QL99_eb0XhJI2Fyw
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaO1QA8QL99_eb0XhJI2Fyw
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/channel/UCaO1QA8QL99_eb0XhJI2Fyw
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
My ex-wife liked to practice horizontality with everyone she met.
I, too, choose to practice horizontality with SatansMaggotyCumFart's wife
Ex-wife.
Very important distinction.
Ayyyyy
Democratically owning the means of production among the workers. Instead of some greedy rich guy who'd want to give as little of the profit as possible to the people actually making the product or providing the service.
See, that works for a farm.
I don't see how it works for a $40 billion chip fabrication plant.
Work isn't just physical you know. Management, planning, etc is work too, and they'd get paid according to how many want to do them, and how hard they are.
The difference is, like I said, that some greedy rich bastard who’d want to give as little of the profit as possible to the people actually making the product or providing the service wouldn't own that means of production.
Simple. You know all those scientists that work at $40 billion chip plants? They would actually take the $40 billion and not some random suit who doesn't do any of the actual work. Executive leadership is important, but it's not worth 1000x the average worker's salary.
So who builds it? Do you just get together with 40,000 of your friends and go "hey if everyone here chips in a million, we can compete with TSMC"?
Organizing it through a Socialist government would probably be the easiest.
And complaining about such a tiny challenge is hilarious lmao
Oh no, a challenge. Let's not even try.
There are examples of exactly this occuring regarding renewables, there are community funded battery/solar farms here in Aus.
If it can be done on that scale, it can definitely be scaled up, it's just a matter of willingness of the community.
You mean capitalist cooperatives? They exist and even Milei wants to turn Aerolíneas Argentinas into one
Co-ops and unions are certainly steps in the right direction, but they're more like temporary band-aids over Capitalism instead of implementing proper Socialism.
Because proper socialism always devolves into tyranny
As capitalism is currently doing...
Source?
[gestures wildly at everything]
Strawman.
People always say this and then fail to provide a single example of when proper socialism existed and then destroyed the country.
"This theory when applied didn't end like in the book, therefore it's not really that theory"
Communism without actually sharing isn't communism. Democracy without fair elections isn't democracy. Socialism without the socialisation of the benefit of production is not socialism. Your ignorance of these things doesn't change what they are.
Again, the "the theory when applied doesn't look like in the book so it's not real communism"
No. The theory when applied doesn't follow the book. The difference is something called contextual nuance, and you have no grasp of it.
Your position is like North Korea claiming democracy doesn't work because they say they are one and it's not working.
The theory when applied ends up not following the book... I wonder why?
Because you can't read, as proven.
The difference is something called contextual nuance, and you have no grasp of it.
Your position is like North Korea claiming democracy doesn't work because they say they are one and it's not working.
You can continue acting stupid, but in your case I'm not sure it's an act.
No, it's not a democracy because it doesn't even bother following actual democratic principles. It's just like Napoleon's idea of democracy: I am the people, therefore if I have absolute power I'm being democratic.
Basically Cuba on steroids
I copy-pasted my answer because you copy-pasted your comment
The only thing like Napoleon's around here is your ego. Shame you don't have the brains to go with it.
North Korea calls itself democratic. Everyone in the country votes for a new leader every five years. It's just that there's only one name on the ballot.
One would be foolhardy to call that democracy.
One would be even more foolhardy to argue that this means that democracy is a stupid idea.
Likewise with socialism.
How so? Cuba has one of the most open democracies in the world. Plus free healthcare, no homelessness, and enough free high level education to provide Italy with doctors during the pandemic.
All while the world's current top superpower is right beside them, sees them as an enemy, and has a still ongoing embargo on them for 60 years now to prevent them from trading with other countries. That'll hopefully change once China's Belt and Road Initiative is complete though.
Clearly this model works. It does require expelling landleeches, plantation owners and billionaires if they don't hand over the means of production to the workers (like Cuba did after the revolution), but I don't think most people would mind that.
It also historically requires fighting off the US though because military, oil, and other private corporation owners can't exploit Socialist countries as much, which is harder.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Cuba has one of the most open democracies in the world
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
That first paragraph already proves that you can't be reasoned with
So you understand my point. Thanks lol
No, it's just pointless to argue with someone so out of touch with reality he believes Cuba is one of the most democratic countries
It is though? People directly nominate individuals in their area, and the ballots are checked in public where anyone can attend.
This results in a Parliament that evenly and properly represents the entire population. That's why Cuba has an unusually high percentage of women in the government, 53.22% now (U.S has 29.0%), and better LGBT rights than the U.S. nowadays.
The power of a proper democracy.
Being rich as an advantage is also taken away by banning advertising yourself/anyone. You need social connections with the people in your area (Socialism) instead.
Not knowing something is fine, but being ignorant and arrogant about it is unfortunate. Though I suppose it is unbelievable, if you're in a Capitalist country, to hear that a nation has solved homelessness, starvation, and education by just changing its political/economic system (and fighting off the US after).
Imagine its sheer potential once it can trade with other countries with that massive advantage, after the US is eventually forced to stop the embargo.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
It is though
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Why is dissent brutally repressed then? Also writing walls of text won't make you right
Downvoting in a discussion is kinda cringe bro ngl, specially without replying why
You mean the 2021 "protests"? Most of it was pro-government/revolution ones against CIA-backed 'protests' that were spun up by Fox News to be pro-US; by blurring out signs and the like. And a fake Twitter campaign run by bots.
Second thought made a great video covering the whole thing; he has sources in the description.
This is nothing new for the US; the CIA staged a coup in Iran to overthrow the democratically elected Mosaddegh because his policies would benefit Iran instead of US's oil companies, caused a mass killing in Indonesia in 1965 and a coup in Chile to replace it with a military dictatorship for similar reasons. Great way to justify military action.
These aren't declassified until decades later for obvious reasons. They're called "color revolutions" and are staged by billion dollar US corporations to set the stage for military or political action. Best way to spot them is seeing if they have US-flags or have signs with generic lines like "Freedom".
That's an oxymoron. There is literally no such thing as a capitalist cooperative. By definition, co-ops are socialist. Also, the right wing populist wants to socialize the airlines?
Yes, he does want to give the airlines to the workers
Also touch some fucking grass to see how agricultural cooperatives work under capitalism
bruh this is the worst 4 panel ive seen this week
This is best content on Lemmy this month.
Political comics are hard to critique because people see it as an attack on the message and not the abysmal quality.
Isn't the message the point? Aren't political cartoons historically the epitome of low-brow art? No one here is writing a thesis on Line Thickness and 17th Century Liberalism Themes In Dilbert.
If by 'worst' you mean 'bravest' and 'truest' and 'most important' then I agree
Making fun of rightoids sure is brave on this site...
making fun of the right wing is a victimless crime as they don't believe victims
Making fun of conservatives on a largely liberal-communist website, damn nothing braver than that lol
Aren't liberals and communists bitter enemies?
Sorry I'll try to illustrate this better.
Liberal ----> Communist
As in, anything to the left of conservative which is the majority user base of the lemmy community. Yes I'm aware liberals are capitalists still, don't try to play these stupid games you know what I meant.
I'm not trying to play any stupid games, I'm asking you a question.
No need to get rude about it.
You're asking a question meant to illustrate that I don't know what I'm talking about because you didn't understand my original comment or you are trying to discredit me because you believe I'm conservative. I'm not, I just think the meme itself is derivative and doesn't understand the POV of conservatives. They aren't convinced gay people have all the money, they just hate LGBT people in general because they're bigots and believe the economy is shit for different reasons entirely.
Strawman arguments seem to be a commonality everywhere, it's not really useful outside of circle jerking that you're smart and no one else is.
I think you are overthinking my comment.
I hear what you're saying, but this is why words are so important. They have meaning. Especially political ideologies.
Which is why I said liberal to communist. Moderate left to far left.
The funniest part is how the artist felt the need to write "the left" and "the right" on the characters as if this highly intellectual commentary is too subtle to understand without help. We've reached below the point of crappy editorial cartoons.
It is too subtle to understand. Without the labels, they're just random people and the message is lost. We're not talking about random dumb dumbs that don't understand how Western oligarchies work, we're talking about the conservatives that actively cheer it on.
I think the content is good. The art feels a little rough, not sure if it is a style or not. If the original author is new at this stuff, this is pretty good. Everyone has to start somewhere.
Too bad there is no working class left. The college educated left liked belittling blue collar workers too much.
There's no blue collar worker's because it doesn't pay enough.
Educated people can and should work in blue collar fields, but unfortunately our society bases everything on money, so leaving blue collar work for higher paying jobs is literally the dear and fluffy capitalism you love so much. Anyone with an education is going to seek the highest paying job possible and none of those are blue collar.
"working class" doesn't mean field hands and electricians, it means everyone that isn't a multi millionaire. I work in IT and am still working class, you work blue collar and are working class, the salesman that works for a bank is working class. Unless you're the owner of a business entity and do not have to work to pay your bills, then you're "working class."
The conservative ideology has ground the middle class into non-existence through the deregulation of the market and the abysmal failure of trickle down economics. Compounded by the uselessness of the Democratic party (cause they're all just old money career politicians too, what a surprise) not doing a damn thing when they're in control of the legislative branch. Not because educated people made fun of yokels too much. You're drawing conclusions out of your feelings, not reality.
Bro, there are tens of millions of blue collar workers nationwide, and depending on the trade, pays exceptionally well. Not millionaire well, but well enough to live reasonably comfortably.
Lmfao what?
Everyone on the left is in the ruling class? Whoa! I'm rich!
I bet you felt really smart typing that
I'm so fucking sick and tired of seeing politics everywhere on lemme. You guys are worse than redditors with this shit
I'm sorry people aren't posting content relevant to your personal preferences.
May I suggest you use filters, or perhaps go fuck yourself?
For a laugh, here's what this definitely consistent person with a principled dislike of politics (which definitely isn't just things they disagree with) posted immediately after their complaint:
Based. If you see something you dont like on the fediverse, you can ignore it (like a sane person) or filter it out (also like a sane person).
Ah. So the "left" aren't social left, they just see money as the answer to all social progression too. Got it. Well that explains our current Western progress and predicament. Lot of growing up to do if, as far as social progression goes, money is seen as a power rather than a weakness. Ain't no one in need getting any that way.
History repeats and we all stay the same. New generation, another dollar.
At least "eat the rich" makes more sense. Robin Hood would rob the guy and not socially recognise them as a king. More important things to do.
Edit: I actually expected more down votes than this (7) and was wanting some discourse. Anyone? I'm looking for someone to state what's not already called out in that a core issue is the perception of monetary wealth being a controlling factor of social imbalance—which of course it is with a society of that perception.
You've all got bank accounts drained for the people, not your house deposit, right? Right? Sorry... Left? Left?
The Left: Rich people are the problem
saltesc: So you agree that money is power? Gotcha!
Everyone: What does that even mean?
saltesc: Don't dismiss my word salad without discourse!
Well, actual left doesn't base itself on economical attributes. So it's interesting to see a meme go straight to wealth while claiming leftism. Part of being on the left is recognisimg wealth as a faux controller and issue. Actual left doesn't socially want in on it too. Actual left would aim at rejecting an acknowledgement of wealth by reinforcing services and freedoms to all without requirement of wealth, thus diluting the importance and value of money.
This comic almost opposes that by weighing importance of wealth. It's insulting to leftism by claiming "this is left".
A lot of the replies seem to be the trending American ideas of leftism which are very new and very unique to a $27T GDP with stonks of social issues. Kind of trying to force the two to connect, but that's not how leftism works.
Y'all can literally Google it right now if you need to know what being left is. It's social equality you're meant to be working on, not getting a piece of the pie. Recognising and blaming distribution of wealth is literally opposing leftism because it's acknowledging and giving finance power. The comic is more "I feel left out" when it should be "your money is nothing".
Bro wants to sound important and educated soooo bad. I actually giggled reading "economical attributes". Like I don't think even you understand what you're trying to say.
Leftists want this. You're not saying something revolutionary. The problem is that in America, getting democratic socialism with redistribution of wealth is much more realistic than a total social overhaul like you're suggesting.
Uhhh no. Capitalism and the govt give finance power. Recognizing and attempting to use the system to better the lives of people isn't the problem, it just isn't the ideal solution. It's a stop-gap.
You can claim "true leftism" all day, but I live in reality where half-assed solutions are better than nothing.
TIL criticism of the status quo isn't left. Neither is criticizing power dynamics. It's not about sharing the cake equally but pretending the cake doesn't exist. This will feed the hungry and house the homeless.
Sure, occupying empty houses will house the homeless but only if you are prepared for the power dynamics which is the police will evict you in no time. I wish money was nothing but force ain't nothing and the state has a monopoly on force, so as long as they think money is something, it is. Good luck with your mutual aid initiative or what ever it is you are doing and we can try to change the system, but we can't just ignore it.
States where the society views money as less important than social issues/equality already have and will continue to get progressive social benefits. You can't put a value on something if every expects it to be free. Lack of wealth is not an issue when everyone expects things to be free. But by recognising wealth and pricetags does money become important and thus hoarded. Th cake isn't money, it's cake. You don't need money redistributed for everyone to get cake when cake is expected as a social staple and offset by the society as a whole.
This is fundamental leftism. A society won't achieve it if they're focused on people having more money than them. "But how will I pay for cake if they have all the money?!" Uhhh, you don't. You demand the cake and halt everything until you get the cake. Once everyone has cake, back to business as usual.
I can't recall a single historical social issue that was resolved by acknowledging and redistributing wealth. Enough people just demanded it and social equality happened.
I love how you totally ignore my point. Sure, money isn't the cake, but housing is. Good luck ignoring the cops that evict you!
Sure, I want a classless, moneyless, stateless society but on the way there, we can't ignore what is. I'm not a Marxist but I think we can agree that Marx was left. He wrote a book "Das Kapital". You can literally google what it is about.
I've read plenty of Marx.
I see your point. However, you are still not understanding. Fair housing can't happen if you think it's about distribution of wealth. Stop thinking it's all about money. It's about social equality. The left would introduce rental caps, tenant benefits, rental assistance programs, more rights and benefits to prevent unfair evictions. But also improve housing for renters to have more equal stance to own instead.
This is what left states do. Left is not considering and focusing on redistributing wealth as the centre of social inequality since it is not a social issue. Money comes after. It is a result. If a self-proclaimed "left" is so obsessed with money, I question their concern of actual social equalities because they too are only thinking about the money and there's no resolve in that.
Nobody said it's only about redistributing money. We are talking about a 4 panel meme that says "Rich people are the problem". It's not a manifesto stating that redistribution will solve all our problems. It's a meme saying rich people are the problem. They are the ruling class. Not everything utterance has to have the solution. Sometimes it's enough to state the problem.
I'm full into solving the housing problem by occupying empty houses and self-organized groups around the concept of mutual aid. We need to abolish money and the state and patriarchy but sometimes it's ok to "just" say "rich people are the problem". This doesn't imply that it's the only one and that the solution is easy. It isn't.
Rich people are the by-product of social inequality. The actual problem. Correcting these things would naturally dissolve the power of money since it devalues its place in society as it is less needed for basic social survival.
But in there lies the true issue. If no longer money—an artificial measure of tracking what is valuable in society—what is the next thing the same people will want to control? Our history is riddled with it. That's the tricky part of we abolish money and it does sound awful nice like you say. Gold, water, people, currency, oil... It's always something. But leftism looks to ensure things like this are avoided, not being side-tracked by trying to cure the symptoms. If you are a leftist, people wih absurd control of something (money in this case) are an indicatior equality has been neglected and there's work to do. Step 1, look at what's making them have so much control and start on all of those things. It's not money. Money's not even valuable to many of the left.
I see this comic and I don't see leftism at all. I see someone upset about finance and doesn't know what to do but blame a specific symptom of inequality impacting them. That's not going to do anything and it's not "left". It indicates a value and focus for money that may even see them do the exact same thing if they amassed some, since it's so important to them than much other else in the complexities of society, especially the actual problems causing it.
My triggering issue is it says "this is left" and "this is right" without sensing the irony. The money part is just...so primitive I couldn't help myself. We see things on spectrums with many points peppered across for just a single individual. What upsets me is this primative two camp idea driving "Whatever I don't like must be right/left" without actually understanding what these things are. It's very clear of a naturally divisive society which is a breeding ground for social inequality. It smells distinctly US where almost many things (and historically so) are a really strong competition of one side versus another. Trying to drag leftism into that is actually opposing to its fundamental ideas. Neglecting the spectrum entirely is straight up regressive of social maturity and stability.
I don't think many people on Lemmy actually know what they are except unhappy, and they are looking for comfort and hope in a home. But the principle ideas of leftism do not conduct itself this way, lest it never succeed in progression.
Edit: Also, I appreciate you sticking with me this far :) It's okay if I've been exhausting enough now though. Exchanging thoughts and ideas is super fulfilling and we always get better for it, even if we don't think anything's sticking.
What does your comment mean though? Feel free to attack my reading comprehension but i don't actually think your comment is making a statement. Distill it so my slow ass understands and maybe (and that's a big maybe) we can try to have some sort of conversation. Judging by the downvotes i presume your opinion is unpopular--i just don't understand it well enough to see why.
Asked and answered. It's incoherent borderline word salad and just comes across as really really trollish, especially with the edit demanding "discourse."
I think his comment is reading way way too much into it. The comic is basically saying that "left" is willing to question authority, while "right" takes it as gospel and asks for more.
There's also the claim that criticising weath disparity while living in a very weath-centric system is somehow an endorsement of that weath-centric system.
Guy seems to just want to dump on the idea of left, so I'll leave a downvote and let him dump in peace.
You criticise wealth disparity, yet live in a capitalist society. Curious. I am very intelligent.
Thanks for taking the time to break that down for me. I will just go ahead and attack my own reading comprehension--i never would have deduced that from their comment, no way.
Could it also have something to do with the fact that nowadays what's called "the right" in the US are extremists and what's called "the left" are center-right/right wing?
Maybe. Seeing some of the follow up commonts, it feels more like a no true scotsman fallacy.
"You can't be left without being extreme left" "the left doesn't do moderate left things!" "Thinking about money proves you aren't left!"
As if wanting anything less than a money-free socialist utopia yesterday isn't left enough.
Ive made the same errors as @saltesc@lemmy.world before and probably worse. For me it came from a depressed headspace and bad mindset.
My opinion is left and it's annoyed that someone would say the comic is left.
While the comic is focused on distribution and accumulation of wealth being an issue, actual left recognises finance as an issue. Society doesn't require wealth for equality. People can be rich in leftism. Leftism is social. Social issues is what it addresses. Thinking "left" is somehow attached to finance is fundamentally anti-social. Thinking money should be better disteibuted and not hoarded by the rich is acknowledging money is power which is anti-social.
None of us with national healthcare systems got them by considering money and the rich and who has and who doesn't have money. We got them by acknowledging health as a social issue. Money be damned.
None of us with nationally assisted higher education got it by considering money and the rich and who has or doesn't have money. We got it by acknowledging education as a social issue. Money be damned.
None of us that with gun regulation got it by considering money and the rich and who has or doesn't have money. We got them by acknowledging public safety as a social issue. Money be damned.
This comic... "Nah, it's money, hey. That's what's stopping us. I'm left 👉👈" It's kind of insulting to the ideology. And I expected backlash on here because Lemmy seems to be riddled with backseat leftists that don't actually know what it is. By acknowledging money as some big value implies that when it comes time to pay for social equality, Lemmingtons and the author of this comic will be upset to be getting less money. That's not an issue when money takes anback seat to social progression aka actual left.
Wtf are you trying to say
You calling me crazy? Just 'cause I got a hotel in my foot doesn't make me a boogalymoogalymoogaly!
No one knows what you're talking about
Robin Hood liked the king. He was noble himself.
Oh yeah, haha. Prince*
You and all of the new conservative sign ups on Lemmy need to go back to 4chan or Truth and have your circle jerk. Lemmy was safely claimed by leftists. You're gonna have a bad time here.
You're making bold assumptions and trying to place me in a tribe you see the world as—but I'm of none of the things you mentioned nor even close. You feel you can say that without much thought or concern though because you feel as though you're protected in your camp, why would you declare it so loudly that I know where I am? The reality is, your camp is small, one of millions, and insignificant in global society and culture. You also clearly know as much about conservatism as leftism if you think anything of what I said was ideals or association of conservatism. This must be just what you've learned in your camp.
But, hey. You keep fighting that "us vs them"—whoever the fuck they are—thing you got going on. That's the irony of your self-painted banner. It doesn't help the world progress and encourages we remain conservative of its old social ways and setbacks.
Tribalism is for the old, the weak, and a disgrace on what we're supposed to be and could be. The world's long been too small for you to bark like a yard dog and be intolerant of everything that walks by. Maybe it's time you start reading about the things you claim to hold so dearly. Or don't. I'm a 4chan "conservative" after all. Nazi next, hm?