this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2024
1122 points (87.3% liked)

Political Memes

5502 readers
1955 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
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

we should jail people for voting for trump

  • Donald Trump is launching a full fascist coup on the American democratic state and if he wins he will kill millions of people, primarily those who are poc, lgbtq, and foreign born. We need to stop him at all costs.

  • Hey, listen, who you vote for is your call and I'm not here to judge. Its just an election, I don't see why you need to make a federal case out of it.

These two views are in sharp contradiction with one another.

[–] timestatic 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

So if Trump is proposing ideas going against the foundation of the State and its constitution we should not let Trump run. How is jailing people for voting Trump a solution?

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

What if someone told you aid to an enemy of the state is the definition of treason. The man tried to overthrow our government with an insurrection, there is no question he is an enemy of the state. (So all who have donated to his compaign and broadcasted for his rise to power have committed treason)

I don't think we should jail Trump voters, but they should at least make aware that just because they believed his/medias lies, doesn't make them immune from all ignorant actions. The first civil war set precedent that you don't need to punish them, but any members who partook who held office prior to the attempt (currently still ongoing) should not be able to hold office in the future as written in the amendment MADE for insurrectionsts. (Even this seems extreme with current events)

Now as we learned from the last time, we should ignore our previous actions and follow what Robert E Lee suggested, that all statues of Trump & the confederates should be taken down (flags as well) and should not be built nor allowed outside museums/textbooks in the future.

His reason was because history showed countries heal faster that way. Ours hasn't healed since the conferency, we did it wrong.

Make possession charges harsh, so they hide again, but next time when the NAZI flag and the KKK burning crosses came to light, they would legally shut it down before it gained traction and spread their hate so far and wide.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So if Trump is proposing ideas going against the foundation of the State and its constitution we should not let Trump run.

He was President for four years and he did a lot worse than "propose ideas". Perhaps we should throw him in jail.

How is jailing people for voting Trump a solution?

It strongly discourages people to support a fascist who threatens my existence.

[–] timestatic 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

So we have an undemocratic state if voting one out of two candidates gets you in jail. This is literally the playbook definition of an autocracy. He should be judged by the actions he took and shouldn't be above the law like the supreme court decided but judging the voters is crazy

[–] mwguy@infosec.pub 3 points 3 months ago

This is literally the playbook definition of an autocracy. He should be judged by the actions he took and shouldn’t be above the law like the supreme court decided but judging the voters is crazy

He's not above the law. Congress Impeached him for it and 57 Senators (less than the 67 needed) voted to convict (including 7 Republicans). But the Democrats rushed it for political reasons. The Nixon Impeachement process took 9 months and it had several hearings evidentiary and others that gave Republicans who didn't and couldn't support impeachment at the start of the process justify impeachment to their constituents. Impeachment is a political process, and Dems politicked like morons.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So we have an undemocratic state if voting one out of two candidates gets you in jail.

The Tolerance Paradox is only resolved when you refuse to tolerate intolerance.

[–] timestatic 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Then drop the candidate but not the masses voting for change.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Since we're wishcasting here, I'd say "¿Por Qué No Los Dos?"

But I agree, getting fascists off the ballot would be the highest imperative. I'd also say that we're not going to do either, so getting angry at someone online for suggesting either one seems silly.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I said nothing about not judging them. They are, at best, gullible rubes. I judge them very harshly. However, I was very explicit that it was about jailing them.

So, sure, if you just make up my position, I can see how you can make it contradictory. Good for you.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They are, at best, gullible rubes.

They know exactly what they're asking for. It isn't as though the homophobia and xenophobia of the American right is some kind of secret. Persecuting minority groups is a signature issue.

However, I was very explicit that it was about jailing them.

And if we were voting on changing the speed limit, I'd agree that taking voting to the level of incarceration would be extreme. But we're talking about policies of mass incarceration, seizure of property, and execution of dissidents. That's the threat that a future Trump Presidency is supposed to present.

So either I was lied to and Future President Donald Trump isn't an existential threat to my existence. Or the reports are sincere and a vote for Donald Trump is the same as a vote for my summary execution.

If a lynch mob shows up outside your door and starts voting on whether or not to string you up, what would you say the remedy is? Lobby them not to kill you? Politely ask them to leave? Or show up on the porch with a shotgun and tell them all to piss off?

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They know exactly what they’re asking for.

For some, sure. For most? It reads more like a justification to act like an authoritarian and jail political opponents. It sounds exactly like when people like trump say the left is coming after Christians.

But we’re talking about policies of mass incarceration, seizure of property, and execution of dissidents.

We're not tho. You're just assuming this will happen. I agree with you it's a distinct risk and we must stop trump because it's far greater than a zero percent chance. But he's not outright calling for it. These people believe he is protecting them and their way of life. Dumb? Yes. Criminal? No.

But can we stop and laugh for a second about you pointing to assumption of mass incarceration as a justification for outright calling for mass incarceration? Which does, pretty clearly, demonstrate my point.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

For most? It reads more like a justification to act like an authoritarian and jail political opponents.

When the political opponents are, themselves, violent domestic terrorists and anti-democratic authoritarians, you'd be a fool to wait until they're installed in the highest levels of government before taking action.

You’re just assuming this will happen.

I am being told "Go out and vote against Trump or this will happen". This was the primary Ridin' With Biden argument and the reason we were supposed to swallow a little like genocide in Gaza for the greater good. There were a bunch of memes and everything. People insisting that a Trump Presidency would amount to a domestic holocaust. People insisting that failure to vote for the Democrat or even a vote for a third party candidate was a tacit endorsement of this pending holocaust.

But can we stop and laugh for a second about you pointing to assumption of mass incarceration as a justification for outright calling for mass incarceration?

Sure. The joke is funniest right down on the US/Mexico border where we've got toddlers behind razor wire, because the governors are all pandering to a political base that wants to end birthright citizenship and deport anyone browner than a cup of milk.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

When the political opponents are, themselves, violent domestic terrorists and anti-democratic authoritarians, you’d be a fool to wait until they’re installed in the highest levels of government before taking action.

Except we're not talking about terrorists and anti democratic authoritarians, we are talking about jailing people for the way they vote. You are, by claiming people should be jailed for the way they vote, being the anti democratic authoritarian.

Again, we both agree that trump is a risk and we need to stop him. But jailing people for falling for his rhetoric and commiting the crime of voting makes you a risk to our democracy as well. The only difference I see between you and trump, on this point at least, is you're explicitly espousing it. He's just using a dog whistle.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Except we’re not talking about terrorists and anti democratic authoritarians

We're talking about their donors, their canvasers, and their supporters.

Again, we both agree that trump is a risk and we need to stop him.

We both agree he should be stopped. I'm not sure we agree on actually stopping him. It seems like we're just going to roll the dice on the election and hope for the best, because doing anything else would be unfair to the fascists.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Hey, listen, who you vote for is your call and I’m not here to judge. Its just an election, I don’t see why you need to make a federal case out of it.

It's clear, even in your own post, that you know we are talking about voters.

It seems like we’re just going to roll the dice on the election and hope for the best, because doing anything else would be unfair to the fascists.

Well, certainly becoming a anti democratic authoritarian seems like a terrible idea to avoid an anti democratic authoritarian. I'm hoping the electorate wakes up and, if it doesn't, the institutions designed to protect us against authoritarianism hold up. I certainly will never get behind jailing people for the crime of voting a way I don't like.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

becoming a anti democratic authoritarian seems like a terrible idea to avoid an anti democratic authoritarian

Don't lift a finger against the lynch mob or you will be no better than the lynch mob.

I’m hoping the electorate wakes up

Maybe they just won't lynch me. Maybe it'll be fine.

the institutions designed to protect us against authoritarianism hold up

Those institutions will be run by the anti-democratic authoritarians you just said you didn't like.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago

Don’t lift a finger against the lynch mob or you will be no better than the lynch mob.

I'm pretty sure I'm every post you've lied about my position in order to make yours. It's gotta tell you something at this point.