this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2024
1041 points (99.1% liked)

Lefty Memes

4102 readers
122 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, upvoting good contributions and downvoting those of low-quality!

Rules

0. Only post socialist memes

That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)

1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here

Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.

2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such,

as well as condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.

3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.

That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).

4. No Bigotry.

The only dangerous minority is the rich.

5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)

6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.

7. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

(This is not a definitive list, the spirit of the other rules still counts! Eventual duplicates with other rules are for emphasis.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kersplomp@programming.dev 70 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Snopes: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/homeless-man-vs-corporate-thief/

It's true, but note that Allan received a reduced sentence for testifying against the actual mastermind of the fraud, who got 30 years.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago (2 children)

So him defrauding millions of times more than what that 15-year sentence guy stole is less bad because the fraudster also snitched on an even bigger fraudster?

I think that isn't an issue. The issue is the clearly disproportionate punishment of 15 years for 100 dollars.

A few years for fraud especially you helped the catch more fraudsters is fine.

15 years for something that won't cover a night out is fucking wrong.

[–] kersplomp@programming.dev 11 points 1 month ago

Absolutely agree, you're preaching to the choir

[–] rekorse@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In most circumstances the dollar amount does matter. The titles are cherry picked. The 100 dollar theft wasnt from a convenience store, he robbed a bank. Is your argument that it was such a bad bank robbery that we shouldnt punish the guy? What about criminal history?

Dramatizing the facts does not help make the point, it makes it less resilient. The situation is already lopsided if we just take the simple facts of what happened, but the titles of these articles are not that.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Trying t8 defend the US justice system is a bold fucking move.

You do knowing about three strikes laws and mandatory minimums right?

There are people serving life sentences for stealing food while most white collar crime, even when convicted, don't get much jailtime at all. Usually fines, or parole or house-arrest in their mansions.

Sometimes a non-violent felony also counts as a third strike, which thus would result in a disproportionate penalty., Three-strikes laws have thus also been criticized for imposing disproportionate penalties and focusing too much on street crime rather than white-collar crime.

The US manufactures crimes so it can legally enslave the poor people. Because slavery is still legal in the US, as long as the slaves are convicted criminals.

That's genuinely propping up a significant portion of the US economy; slave labour from prisons which are filled up with all kinds of excuses.

The wealthy 'make mistakes', the poor go to jail

Pretending you don't understand this is the reality of the situation is making me question your humanity.

[–] rekorse@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well you just keep on pushing people away with your exaggerations. My second favorite part is where you assume any critique must mean I support the current system.

Read better. I said this is already a great example of inequality without obfuscating details. Since it stands on its own merits, any efforts to exaggerate either way is reducing the effectiveness of your message. Honesty is important.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] rekorse@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Are we really defending headlines in articles now?They always are missing nuance, as a rule. All I said was its important not to exaggerate. After reading all the details its still absurd.

I'm saying headlines like that can push people away as much as it can grab them. I generally dont like headlines that are designed to invoke a certain emotional response.

I dont want to discuss how this makes people feel, I want to discuss the details and why things are the way they are, so we can go about trying to fix them.

And you can save the links, although I do enjoy the reading, cause like I said I already agree with your position: its not just or fair or equal or any of that.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Twice as long as the homeless man, yes.

The difference in dollars and impact though, and considering who turned themselves in... It's still an egregious sentence for $100.

[–] bluewing@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It wasn't the amount - It was the "who" that the homeless person robbed. He didn't steal from a local liquor store or 7/11. He robbed from a bank. And bank robbery, since the time there have been banks to rob from, has always carried certain heavy punishments. And the punishments are well known to even a homeless person. And very often the judge gets no choice or leeway in the sentencing.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago

And TB&W also stole from banks through fraud.

The judge isn't the issue being called out, the laws and associated punishments are.

So.. yes. And my point stands.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

And the punishments are well known to even a homeless person.

The bootlicking condescension is strong here.

[–] oo1@lemmings.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

you can't easily or directly compare the monetary value of violent vs non-violent crime. Robbery is not about the money from a severity perspective. Any robbery will be much more heavily punished than a theft of the same monetary value due to the violence or threat of violence agaist the person or people.

If you stick a gun in someones face and ask them for one cent, you still should be going to jail for a decent amount of time - way more than shoplifting a 500 dollar tv.

15 years does seem a lot though, you might have expected them to at least wave the weapon around, or put it direct to someones head, or put a knife to the throat - that doesn't seem to be the case here. but if it were less than 5 , I'd think they'd got off lightly for robbery.

The homeless guy should have shoplifted food from grocery store - not gone and threatened someones life.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

That's certainly quite the interpretation of what happened when Roy Brown went into the bank, said "this is a stickup" with no weapon, was handed three stacks of bills, took a single $100 bill, handed the rest back and said "Sorry, I'm homeless".

In other words, not remotely what you described.

Goodbye.