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!
Oldie but goodie.
Transcript: Tweet by the SRSLY wrong podcast. Content: "message to my enemies: when the revolution comes you're not just gonna get the wall, buddy, you're gonna get four walls, a roof, clean clothes, good food, education, and quality health care because that's what every human being alive deserves"
The difference between me and op is I’d rather give people like you a bullet.
How about instead of complaining about refugees, you go after the companies and billionaires who’ve fucked the world over and stolen your wealth?
Why is it so easy for you to talk about executing someone?
Because people who want to target the weak and innocent over the greedy and abusive are the biggest enablers of the world’s problems.
Considering despite having access to the Internet and all the resources that entails, they still spout such nonsense means they can’t be convinced otherwise through reasoning.
In other words, for a better world they need to go. They chose the hard way and I’m sick of catering to them as people suffer.
The better question to ask is will you radicalise before the world is dead?
So, who's gonna decide who's gonna get shot? How will you avoid a Robbespierre situaion?
Imagine posting such a meme (and claiming you support anarchism) but being (or acting) completely ignorant of the paradox of tolerance..
The reason we don't have human rights for all is because of people with a vested interest in oppressing others and the systems they maintain, and most will never willingly just give up their power (yes, including the power to be one up from the bottom but being able to punch down at another marginalised group, eg immigrants).
Which is why there is zero room to tolerate bigotry and oppression, nor those who, given a chance to be better, still refuse.
I never claimed I was against self defense. I just refuse to accept the IDF's definition of the word.
Have you replied to the wrong person? If not, what the fuck does the IDF's definition of anything have to do with this conversation?
Sorry if that flew over your head. I still refuse your premise that I condone the violence of bigots if I don't support stalinist death squads.
Defending against a bigot's violence is self-defense. Executions by death squads aren't.
Nothing flew over my head, you're just trying to muddy the waters.
I am the farthest thing from a Stalinist, and I am not in support of death squads.
What I am in support of, as I mentioned in my comment, and knew you would ignore (I went back and highlighted it for you), is giving them plenty of opportunity to stop being bigots (they get them every single day). But when they continue to refuse - meaning they are actively threatening the lives of marginalised people, I am no longer obligated to care for their safety nor tolerate their behaviours, which they openly declare they are willing to kill and die to preserve.
The fact that you and others here are more concerned for the hypothetical safety of the bigot in this thread than you are for the actual safety of the people they are an active and very real threat to, says it all really. You only support self defence on your terms, but you're not the one being threatened, so that's not how it works.
Yeah. That's self-defense. I never claimed I was against self-defense (It's a meme, buddy).
Never said anything of the sort. Please stop twisting my words.
Did you know there is an entire school of anarchism devoted to nonviolence?
At the end of the day, it'll just be the people in charge of whatever band of rebels comes out on top, and whatever local faction of them ends up in power across the country as a result of that. That's all the founding fathers of the US were. We like to think of them as heroes, but they and their constituents were just the guys who got to choose who was a traitor and who wasn't. History painted the winners more colorfully than they were, as it always does.
I'm sure the birth of my country was a terrifying time for anyone who wasn't squarely proven to be aligned with the revolution, and the same will be true when people have had enough in modern times as well.
Yeah, reminds me of why I prefer anarchism, i.e. bottom-up decision making.
You are on the list now, get ready to get purged because of one comment in which you questioned the holy revolution /s
When will we anarchists learn? ;_; /j
You are literally thinking about executing someone because of ONE comment they made and somehow act as if that is going to safe the world. Its just ridiculous.
I am in no way or form against violent revolution, insurrection, riots, antifascist violence, self defense or plain revenge. But you just said that someone deserved to be executed because of one comment. Idk how a world where this is possible is something worth fighting for and I guess in the end, we wont be on the same side after all.
Do the people calling for executions deserve to be executed themselves for being "rabid dogs" like you say? You are batshit insane. Stop calling for peoples' deaths.
Eh sure if i'm a really bad person like pedophiles, human traffickers, rapists etc etc. I'd want you to put a bullet in my head but as far as i'm aware i'm still not, but by all means if i go that way feel free . Also i wasn't implying the commentors death but saying why some people deserve it and not saying someone should be executed for an edgy comment .
You are calling for other people's deaths and willing to kill. That makes you a murderer in the making.
Oh by that logic you'd not even kill hitler . Also what do you think people do in wars kiss each other ? And i'm pretty sure you'd kill for YOUR life not just for others because you consider others life as lesser and is just a prick now gtfo of my face.
Yes, I wouldn't even kill Hitler. I wouldn't kill anyone. Because I am not a murderer. You make plenty of assumptions about me, which feel like projecting.
Oh fuck off by not killing hitler you'd be indirectly letting millions of others die . See your a person who'd be happy to see a million more die so you can keep your hands clean and i'm the bad guy ? Good joke .
No, I wouldn't since time travel doesn't exist and you pretending it does is a shitty hypothetical. I say again - I am not a murderer. I will not kill people. You are not a good guy by saying "I will kill people"
Why is it so easy for you to jump in to a conversation just to defend a bigot?
I called a (maybe not) comrade out for their violent and authoritarian delusions. If that counts as defending someone who made a racist and factually wrong comment, I think I stay away from your crowd. Might get shot and stuff
It's the fact that you're more concerned with the person threatening the bigot, than you are with the bigot threatening marginalised people, especially since one is hypothetical, and the other is very really happening all around you as we type.
You're just telling on your priorities, that's all.. ¯\(ツ)/¯
I reported the troll and moved on, I think my priorities are actually in a good place. I think its annoying that my open questions gets constructed as defending bigotry, but I guess its not easy to assume good faith on the internet.
Where are they doing that?