Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.
Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.
This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.
Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Rules
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
So instead of asking how they can collaborate to get shit done in the common interest and what to reform first, the first thing sign boy asks is "who's next".
I'm split between two different thoughts in hat man's head - it's either "you are" or "what the fuck are you on about".
Having an enemy is powerful stuff. Try not to get addicted to it.
That’s because the comic is originally for gay republicans.
Subtext: How does it fucking work?
I mean, there are plenty of people you need to get rid of before you can realistically change anything. Also anarchists tend to not prefer reform.
does it mean blue hat guy was a robot who had frozen or something
It means that the guy in the blue hat thinks that "we" should go after the guy with the placard next
Also the placard is the anarchist flag, in case anyone might not be aware.
Anarcho-communism / syndicalism to be exact. There's more anarchist flags
I think I'd be disappointed if there were a single, rigorously-defined flag for anarchism
I think it means he's a Marxist who believes the next step is to use the state to protect the revolution against anarchist scum?
r/yourjokebutanarchy
*whom
In only one of the three instances, yes, but just use who. It's acceptable and unpretentious.
fyi: “whom" is the correct word to use in two of the three instances.
here’s a tip: if the answer to the question is him, her, or them (as opposed to he, she, or they), then whom is to be used in the question.
there’s nothing pretentious about correctness. it’s about the nominative case vs the accusative case.
Language is descriptive, not prescriptive. The "correct" way to speak is the way that is understood.
Spent my youth being whipped in school over correctness. Picked up my first Stephen King book, Pet Sematary, at 14 and was like, "The hell?! He's not following the rules but this prose rocks out!"
Yeah, it is absolutely pretentious. The correction isn't about clarity, but the superiority of someone who "knows better" than others, those dummies.
Also, no, it's one. The answer to "Who is next?" is not "Me is next" or "Him is next" but "I am next" or "He is next". This is related to something called a predicate nominative. Read up at https://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/predicate_nominative.htm
So if you're going to be pretentious about grammar, you'd best bring your A game so you don't end up hoisting yourself with your own petard. Or just act like a grammar anarchist and not a grammar authoritarian.
you'd best bring your A game
This is the funniest grammar nazi post I have read in my life. Sitting here down with COIVD, can't breathe for shit, giggling my ass off. Get 'em!
the question is not “who is next?”, but it’s “who(m) are we going after next?”
the “who(m)” is not the subject of the sentence here. it’s the object. the subject is the “we”. so “whom” applies here.
if the question were indeed “who is next?” (as you have misread it), then your point would be valid. but your entire argument stems from an incorrect premise.
No, I didn't misread it. It's literally in the comic right up there. There's one "Who are we going after next." That's the one that whom is correct for. Then there's "Who's next?" which whom is incorrect for. Who is. Grammar doesn't care about the sentence before. Did you even read the link about predicate nominatives? It explains why. Go read it.
Now do the ablative and dative.
It would be pretentious in this context. If you're writing a novel or article or even a lemmy post, it's totally fine.
