this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
729 points (92.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

8358 readers
2482 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(this is a sarcastic post meant to highlight the absurdity of some of the “greater good” rhetoric we’ve been hearing, especially around leaving vulnerable populations like disabled people behind in case of revolution, basically accelerationism)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] parody@lemmings.world 32 points 2 months ago (27 children)

Difficult to raise this amongst friends but one 2022 story came to mind

https://www.vox.com/policy/385549/trans-sports-transgender-biden-harris-democrats-titleix

PS: obviously my conflict is about “fight for 1% of athletes vs. lose election to Hitlerguy and harm like 50% of the population”, to oversimplify greatly

[–] LeninsOvaries@lemmy.cafe 41 points 2 months ago (9 children)

I bet we could get even more of these conservatives on our side if we promised to repeal gay marriage. Let's try that, too

Ooh, and we could get even more people if we promised to put the Jews in camps

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 34 points 2 months ago (2 children)

If you aren't going to fight for that "1% of athletes" even though you think they're right just because they're too politically inconvenient then I have zero faith you'll fight for me when I'm politically inconvenient and actually need you to

[–] parody@lemmings.world -5 points 2 months ago

I think the point there was reasonable disagreements exist amongst us allies so we can focus on the 99% where we agree entirely

I haven’t mentioned… today… how sickening this is. Sorry to be talking so GOPy. That ain’t me

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 26 points 2 months ago (3 children)

“fight for 1% of athletes vs. lose election to Hitlerguy and harm like 50% of the population”

Republicans who got on the "Freak out about transgender policy" lost their elections in droves in 2022. Several big swing Senate seats flipped because guys like Blake Masters and Herschel Walker couldn't stop screaming slurs at campaign rallies. We've seen Republicans scrub out over and over again by downing too much of their own kool-aid.

Democrats didn't lose 2024 because they were too nice to Transgender people. They lost because they were too nice to Liz Cheney. Harris made a big show of aligning with neoconservatives on everything from immigration and trade to military policies against Russia and China to the stubborn endorsement of the Palestine genocide. All of this shit polled worse than support for Transgender civil rights. Harris had no problem throwing the country in front of Hitlerguy to endorse the tear-gassing of Columbia University and the Kids In Cages on the Texas/Mexico border.

Even then... even if you can argue with a stack full of polling papers that Harris knew with perfect certainty and well in advance of the November vote that an impassioned speech in defense of transgender athletes would doom her campaign and subject the US to Hitlerguy, so what? She didn't do this and she still fucking lost.

So she and the rest of her squishy latte liberal cohort threw away a big chunk of LGBTQ support for what? What did Dems gain by embracing reactionary policy?

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 32 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Democrats didn't lose 2024 because they were too nice to Transgender people. They lost because they were too nice to Liz Cheney.

This right here can't be said enough. The problem isn't policies that are too leftist. It's the "liberals" that a working so hard to cozy up to conservatives. If we wanted moderate Republicans we'd vote for 'em. We want fucking leftists goddammit!!!

[–] witnessbolt@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

On one hand I don't fucking like Liz Cheney... on the other hand.... I think you should welcome (almost) anyone against an enemy like Trump. I thought that at the time, and now with the additional information we've gained since then (and I personally learned) only reaffirm that to me. We don't have to glorify Liz Cheney later.

But not voting for Kamala because the coalition allowed Liz Cheney in is probably just as dumb as not voting for Kamala because somehow... Trump isn't WORSE on Palestine?

There is not a "single issue" that won for them beyond voter manipulation. They did the same thing as 2016 and did targeted ads and segmenting people on social media. Mass voter suppression in the south (Russian bomb threats in Georgia... the disenfranchisement across multiple states...etc) FB & Twitter owned by them. TikTok in question but absolutely started showing even more right wing content after the election. I'm sure one issue (or two) might be more influential, but that's only because of the coordinated reach of their voter manipulation.

We have ALL been targeted with propaganda and segmented from each other. They continue to do it now. They lie and Fox News, which something like 60% of the country, carries their lies for them. Bots barrage social media every where. Tech-bro toelickers and tankies promote right wing, anti-globalist propaganda everywhere. (Anti-globalism is primarily right wing, Kremlin propaganda to disconnect The Americas (primarily US ofc) from Europe).

Be wary of bots that feel like they're your ally, too.

"But the 63 per cent of the German people who expressed their opposition to Hitler were much too divided and shortsighted to combine against a common danger which they must have known would overwhelm them unless they united, however temporarily, to stamp it out.”

Excerpt From The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich Shirer, William

[–] Eyekaytee@aussie.zone 0 points 2 months ago

So she and the rest of her squishy latte liberal cohort threw away a big chunk of LGBTQ support for what? What did Dems gain by embracing reactionary policy?

Why are you asking what the dems gained? You’re the one now worse off?

What did you gain by not voting for her?

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The problem with this is that it assumes Democrats have no agency. Democratic politicians have treated trans issues like those crusty old male Dems who don't like saying the word abortion.

Dems have never provided loud and full-throated support to trans issues. Go watch the recent John Oliver video on trans sports. There are very very good arguments on why excluding trans people from sports is incredibly anti-scientific and just thinly disguised bigotry. But Democratic politicians have never bothered developing the talking points to defend trans people, like they have for other core issues.

Look at how Kamala responded when asked about trans issues. She didn't provide full-throated support to trans people. Her reply was simply, "I'll follow the law."

Democrats have completely failed to defend trans people. They've quietly passed a few state level anti-discrimination laws, but in terms of rhetoric, they've completely ceded the space to conservatives. The only mainstream voices talking about trans issues have been the anti-trans bigots. The Democrats have instead just called the whole issue a distraction and hoped it would all just blow away.

They're right that it is a distraction, an artificial one concocted by Republicans. But that doesn't mean they can just ignore it.

Propaganda works. And if you don't do the hard rhetorical work to fight it, it eventually does change public opinion.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Her reply was simply, "I'll follow the law."

Well, that's more than she was willing to do for Gaza.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

and now gaza is safe, and everyone clapped.

oh wait, no, trump wants to annex it.

along with greenland and canada and the panama canal.

something tells me these populations would have preferred the 'I'll follow the law' candidate happily vs the 'i'll annex your country unilaterally' shitbag.

but you don't fucking care about any of them lol. you got your principled win, good for you, and now the trans folks will be persecuted actively, gaza will be torn apart and sold to the highest bidders, and american kids are going to die invading our former allies.

great fucking work, your principles are fantastic.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Propaganda works. And if you don’t do the hard rhetorical work to fight it, it eventually does change public opinion.

yeah it never works on you, no sir... we're all a lot better because everyone stood by their principles and punished the bad biden/harris team, yep, so much better.

those trans people, they'll be safe now.

those kids in gaza, I'm sure now that trump's won he'll make sure they're safe.

Yeah this all punishing those bad bad dems you'll show 'em.

stupid fucking liberals, when will they learn their lesson.

working out great.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Trans people were being maimed and killed under Biden too, nothing changed for the trans people in the red states, violating the 14th amendment under Biden's watch. Trump won't care, Biden could have cared and chose not to.

Kids in gaza were being murdered and bombed under Biden too, nothing changed for them when a blue guy signs off on bombs or a red guy signs off on bombs. Trump won't care, Biden could have cared and chose not to.

One is honest in being evil and hating people. It's in the name "Republican." The other pretends to tolerate you, and then throws you under the bus come election season to appeal to the greater evil's voting base, who wants the most evil and won't vote for a lesser evil.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world -4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

keep telling yourself they're the same bud.

lie to yourself all you want. calling it the same is ridiculous and you know it.

ya done fucked the pooch on this one so bad it's going to wreck the whole fucking thing, but hey, you stuck to your convictions, no matter how short sighted.

gonna block you now, have a wretched life living through the consequences you brought on yourselves.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I voted Harris and said Republicans are worse, but sure man, your bubble won't pop when Trump uses America's decades long polices domestically. Sorry I acknowledge trans people outside of the month of November every 4 years.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So, how large does a minority have to be before they are no longer disposable?

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago

Lincoln didn't run on ending slavery, but plenty of abolitionists supported him, including Frederick Douglas

Douglass was also very involved in national politics, and as the presidential election of 1860 approached, he advocated for candidates with strong antislavery platforms. American voters received a ballot crowded with four candidates: Abraham Lincoln (Republican), John C. Breckenridge (Southern Democrat), Stephen A. Douglas (Democrat), and John Bell (Constitutional Union). Douglas’s belief in “popular sovereignty,” Breckenridge’s pro-slavery platform, and Bell’s aversion to the issue entirely left Frederick Douglass to endorse Lincoln and the Republicans, whom he believed were more antislavery than the divided Democrats.

[–] parody@lemmings.world -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It’s possible to be willing to jump in front of a bullet to save a trans brother and loudly tell everyone to shut the fuck up about sports until we codify the right protections into the constitution etc.

Back channels baby! Back channel fights on controversial topics. Fox News can’t demonize what they’re ignorant of.

But this is assuming this topic is popular on the left and it’s reportedly divisive (again, amongst those who are not hateful scumbags)

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you think that you can change the Constitution through back channels, then I need to know what you're smoking.

[–] parody@lemmings.world -3 points 2 months ago

Backchannel until [super]majority agreement achieved before going public!

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Back channels! Where you can say you're doing something but aren't actually doing shit!

Back channels are the only place where democrats oppose genocide, support unions, try to keep abortion legal, and are diligently working to make cannabis legal.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

reminds me of 2003, when the bush regime convinced everyone that their marriage would somehow be worthless if they let the gays get married.

and it worked, the stupid fucks bought it. iraq paid badly for it tho, whoo hoo...

load more comments (21 replies)