this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
881 points (86.8% liked)

Political Memes

5515 readers
1080 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Agreed. I would add to that -- there's actually an incredibly instructive example to draw by looking at the non-violent-revolutionary movements that did achieve big social change in the past. The US labor movement in the late 1800s, Gandhi's independence movement, the US civil rights movement with its partial victory, things like that. There are a ton of examples of people who achieved big things to revise the systems that rule their daily lives, starting from a way less advantaged position than the left in the modern day US. It's not easy, no, but compared to an Indian person under the British Raj it's an absolute cakewalk.

Strangely enough, the people who are so incredibly upset with the broken system in the US as it pertains to this election (which, yeah, I get that), are somehow totally uninterested in looking at what actions big or small might produce positive change. They're solely focused on criticizing Biden and only Biden, or on saying that it's so broken that we might as well let Trump come to power because what's the difference.

It's like "The plane is having engine trouble and I don't know if we're going to make it. I'm real scared and upset about the situation we're in. I know! Let's shoot the pilot in the head."

[–] [email protected] 26 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Wasn't the us labor movement violent? I seem to remember something about troops firing on striking miners.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago

Mine owners utilized violence and essentially wage slavery to keep miners from unionizing and asking for more fair working conditions. Pinkertons got their reputation as being violent corporate mercenaries in this period, and they continue to be. The violence caused miners to fight back, and when they did the US army got involved usually in the interest of the mine owners. The lead up to the Battle of Blair Mountain is one of the best examples of this and maybe the most impactful.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

It was nonviolent, until bosses/police starting shooting miners and their families, at which point it developed into a small-scale civil war. So yes, I shouldn't have simply said blanket non violent I guess... I was just trying to draw a distinction between "let's fight for justice for ourselves" versus "let's storm the capital and do away with the leaders" as two roads (with the first being more effective, and the second often leading to catastrophe instead of the progress that was hoped for.)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

They would engage in retaliatory violence but the first shot was never fired by the labor organizers

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well said.

I believe a fraction of them are actual authoritarian sympathizers, and are just hoping "their brand" will align with a future hypothetical autocrat.

They don't want actual justice, they just want to reroll the dice and hopefully come out on top.

To the other fraction, I think those folks are exactly the folks who completed those movements you mentioned. They worked hard to push the existing system towards their goal, often starting from a very weak position.

That pushing largely isn't done, and it is less glamorous and obvious compared to flipping the table, killing the current leaders (and a bunch of other demonized but innocent groups oopsie daisy) and trying again. That's how you get a Khmer rouge and then a pol pot.

We need another MLK and his contemporaries.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I agree, we really need some leftists who have the backbone of MLK.

Now let me say a word for those of you who are on strike. You’ve been out now for a number of days. But don’t despair. Nothing worthwhile is gained without sacrifice. The thing for you to do is stay together. Say to everybody in this community that you’re going to stick it out to the end until every demand is met. And that you’re going to say, “We ain’t going to let nobody turn us around.” Let it be known everywhere that along with wages and all of the other securities that you are struggling for, you’re also struggling for the right to organize and be recognized…

We can all get more together than we can apart. This is the way to gain power. Power is the ability to achieve purpose. Power is the ability to effect change. We need power…

Now the other thing is that nothing is gained without pressure. Don’t let anybody tell you to go back on your job and paternalistically say, now, “You’re my man, and I’m going to do the right thing for you if you’ll just come back on the job.” Don’t go back on the job until the demands are met. Never forget that freedom is not something that must be demanded by the oppressor. It is something that must be demanded by the oppressed. Freedom is not some lavish dish that the power structure and the white forces imparted with making positions will voluntarily hand down on a silver platter while the Negro merely furnishes the appetite.

If we are going to get equality, if we are going to get adequate wages, we are going to have to struggle for it. Now, you know what, you may have to escalate the struggle a bit. If they keep refusing, and they will not recognize the union, and will not decree further check-off for the collection of dues, I’m telling you what you ought to do, and you’re together here enough to do it. In a few days you ought to get together and just have a general work stoppage in the city of Memphis.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (46 children)

Now that shit will fire you up. Good stuff.

Notice he was very forceful and determined, but never said stupid stuff like "hurr let's get the guillotine!"

load more comments (46 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Lol what a fruitful day of reading: since you mentioned Gandhi...

Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation with good.

Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French.

A 'No' uttered from the deepest conviction is better than a 'Yes' merely uttered to please, or worse, to avoid trouble.

Fear has its use but cowardice has none.

Man lives freely only by his readiness to die, if need be, at the hands of his brother, never by killing him.

It is any day better to stand erect with a broken and bandaged head then to crawl on one's belly, in order to be able to save one's head.

Is it not enough to know the evil to shun it? If not, we should be sincere enough to admit that we love evil too well to give it up.

If co-operation is a duty, I hold that non-co-operation also under certain conditions is equally a duty.

Honestly, of all the civil rights figures you could have cited, Gandhi is the one who would tell you that non-cooperation with evil is more important than self-preservation. How on earth could you look at Gandhi and say; 'he would want me to vote for the lesser evil'?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (27 children)

I thought we had worked this out earlier, talking about Bull Connor. I was all on board when I thought you were saying, let's give Biden a hard time over Gaza. Now I'm a lot less sure what you're saying.

Do you think working as a collaborator of the Raj, is more or less the same as voting for the clearly less-genocide-supporting of two arguably-genocide-supporting candidates?

Would this apply also to refusing to vote for Boutwell over Connor, or refusing to vote for the SDP (with all its colonial adventures in Africa and etc) over the NSDAP in prewar Germany?

load more comments (27 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Gandhi worked with the lesser evil plenty to earn India's independence. He negotiated with Britain on pacts and agreements that didn't result in India's freedom but generally gained them more autonomy and fairness. He even supported the British in WW2 and suspended independence efforts at the time.

If Gandhi said "okay hold up, let's take care of the fascists alongside our colonizers"*, I think he would want you to vote for the lesser evil. I think we can infer from his actions that progressively achieving a goal through nonviolence is something he wholeheartedly supported.

*(Granted, he still advocated that Japan and the Nazis be defeated without significant violence)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And Douglass eventually worked with Lincoln, but not before ruthlessly criticizing him and supporting the dump-lincoln movement

Gandhi refused repeated offers from the British, he absolutely did not just accept their offer as given.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

True, but the offers he did accept were not immediate independence for India. He knew when to take a good compromise and when to push for more. He continued to negotiate with the British while taking imperfect, but good deals.