Cross-posted from "The ultimate centrist" by @corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net in !chapotraphouse@hexbear.net
These two things are the same 
this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2026
336 points (97.7% liked)
Flippanarchy
1891 readers
670 users here now
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.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean this is stupid but there's way more stupid forms of enlightened centrism. Like if we're just mourning victims of police violence, even if they're reactionary assholes I think that's a net positive.
What horrible opinion to have.
Babbitt was not a victim of the overall issues with police violence. She was part of a violent insurrection who had to be stopped from physically attacking congress.
I understand that. They still killed her. Being upset about that is a normal human response regardless of her crimes.
Babbitt was not a victim.
Why not?
i describe the issues with the January 6 insurrectionists and the peaceful transfer of power within the republican (government structure, not party) state in similar terms to the paradox of tolerance. it's a paradox of pacifism, or more accurately, a paradox of anti-violence. in a society that values non-violence, violent threats to pacifism cannot be allowed to stand. the reason this is is that pacifism is a social contract, not a virtue. we can have a long conversation somewhere else about that ashlii babbit and her friends did get one thing right: that the american system of structural violence will only ever be ended with a violent uprising that opposes it.
the problem lies in what ashlii babbitt and her friends were using violence to establish. they wanted to end the tradition of the american non-violent transfer of power in order to give more authority to a central autocracy to strengthen the police state. this central autocracy and strengthened police state would later go on to kill Renee Nicole Good via the hands of jonathan ross.
i can empathize with being saddened at the loss of life of a deluded human being. however i cannot sympathize with being saddened at a man defending the non-violent transfer of power killing a woman who wanted to intensify the structural violence of the system she lived under. ashlii babbit was not the victim of police violence. he death was the result of a desperate effort to keep a violent status quo from getting more violent.
i don't think the cop that shot her understood that the status quo is violence, but i think he understood that ashlii babbitt represented more violence than a non-violent society can be allowed to tolerate.
Part of an armed mob beating cops and forcibly entering a building where the mob was chanting that they would hang members of the government?
You are right. I've got nothing beyond that.
I mean, nothing was wrong with their methods. It's what needs to happen. What was wrong was the reasons they wanted to engage in those actions.
Cops deserve to eat the curb and the members of our government deserve to hang. I can't disagree with that. The only thing I disagree with is that they wanted to do so in order to enable fascism.
I'm confused, are you saying there was nothing wrong with an armed mob invading the capital and trying to hang our government?
Yes. The actors of our Imperialist establishment deserve to be hung and the people are more than justified in revolting against it.
What do you think a revolution entails? Do you still think our government exists to serve us? How naive are you?
You are a real peach, and people clearly desire to be in your company and entertain conversations with you.
Cry me a river and keep licking those boots.
Look man I've been hearing this s*** ever since I was a child, mostly from the Republicans and libertarians. You're not new. You're not interested. You're just a bored dude who really isn't doing anything behind the keyboard. Be bold and do the s*** yourself or shut the f****** up.
Bitch, you're in an anarchist sub. The fuck you expect? Us to praise our Imperialist oppressors? Piss off, politically ignorant twit.
Can't even tell the difference between right-wing co-opting of leftist language and actual leftist rhetoric. All you can do is throw out pedantic, assumptive insults instead of any legitimate argument against why people shouldn't revolt against oppressive institutions.
B****, what do you think is going to happen when you take out somebody in the government and get a full scale military occupation?
I don't care where I am stupid is stupid.
Oh fuck off with that trite "don't give them an excuse for what they are already doing" bullshit. Simpleton.
You're right, stupid is stupid, and stupid is you. If you want to live the rest of your life on your knees be my guest.
You never answered my question. What do you do when you incite the largest military force in the world. And one of the largest police forces in the world, especially with ice.
You actually do remind me of the "anarchists" I meant when I was 12. No real inside, just arbitrary action.
And it does matter. We could invite something crushingly worse under a complete military occupation.
I don't owe you an answer and you're no authority of which I respect to have my ideals judged by. Your lack of knowledge is not my problem and I don't have the patience to explain revolutionary theory nor guerilla tactics to ignorant fools blinded and cowed by propaganda.
You remind me of every braindead liberal who wants nothing more than to be a good little slave to the state. Don't make waves, never stand up for yourself and others. Just good little doormats for the hierarchy to walk over and abuse.
No, it doesn't matter. There is no worse than "the state actively killing people in the streets". You only think the other is worse because then your skin is on the line, not just the lives of those you care nothing for. So piss off with your shortsighted, cowardly excuse to be a slave. You think worse isn't already going to come regardless? Then you're fucking stupid.
You're just a coward who has no solidarity.
So your ideals are short in thought and short-lived. I promise you the weapons that you're talking about in the hands of your enemy are much greater than you ever imagine.
You remind me of the right wing tend to eating dorks with big guns talking about taking over in the case of a tyrannical government.
I suggest you read a little bit on what this sort of thing entails. And especially how infrequently and succeeds.
If you want to be a simpleton and assume that just because I won't entertain you that my internal thoughts are just as shallow as this conversation, then go ahead and assume. It's what you're going to do anyway and have done this entire thread.
Also, I never mentioned weapons. So don't know where except your ass you pulled that from.
Again, you cannot tell the difference between right wing and left wing rhetoric, just showcasing how ignorant you are.
I've read plenty, thanks. We are not all as ignorant as you. Doesn't change that it is what is needed to be done if we are to have a better society. Revolutions don't happen because they are easy. They happen because they are necessary.
So piss off, live on your knees if that's what you want, but do it far from me.
Wow, you're boring. You're 15 aren't you?
Boo-hoo, I won't entertain you. Cry about it.
If I wanted my own comeback I'd ask ya mum.
Weak.
You asked for a justification. You didn't provide any additional parameters. This is on you.
The most common definition of a victim is someone who dies from a crime, and the word carries an underlying meaning of the harm coming from something not justified.
She wasn't killed because the police overreacted or because they are trained to shoot first, she was breaking through a barrier in pursuit of committing violence and had to be stopped. Previous non-lethal attempts to stop the violence were attempted, and she was part of a crowd that could overwhelm the security. Lethal violence was needed to defend lives and therefore she is not a victim.
This is not comparable to police overreacting with disproportionate violence.
I know I used the word crime above but I don't consider most laws morally legitimate so whether it was a crime or not is barely relevant.
I don't think it's wrong to describe someone who was killed by another person as a victim. Even if they were guilty of horrible crimes.
This is a conversation I've had several times. I think it's very strange that so many leftists claim to want to dismantle our justice system but endorse the same punitive logic behind it. Maybe it was necessary to kill Ashlee Babbitt, frankly, I don't know all the details. But she was killed by the police and that makes her a victim in my mind nonetheless. Killing someone is always a bad thing. Sometimes it's just the least bad thing you can do.
I think it is, personally, wrong to define someone who died as a result of their own actions as a victim. I think storming a building filled with armed individuals and expecting them to not use them on you places you firmly in the realm of 'not a victim'. That's like playing on a railroad, getting hit by a train, then blaming the train.
I would not define someone who commits suicide as a victim. I would describe everyone left behind as a victim, but not the person who kills themselves. * For example, we in the U.S. are victims of the Jan. 6th insurrection due to the downstream effects on our current politics. Disclaimer: I believe everyone should have the right to end their lives however they want.
Beyond that, I also think it's odd to use terms like 'good' and 'bad (evil)' when discussing things like this. Is it 'bad' to kill a serial rapist? Is it 'bad' to kill a child rapist? Am I a 'bad' guy for killing a 'bad' person?
Death is a natural consequence of life, we do not live forever. I think there are plenty of examples, naturally and fictionally, of why death is necessary.
Edit*: provided an example
Good to see some actual nuanced leftist takes even if they are being heavily downvoted.
Lemmings love the downvote button way too much for some reason so I try not to worry too much about it anymore.
I'm not sad about police shooting Babbit like I'm not sad about Hitler shooting himself. She got exactly what she deserved.
The same thing apparently…
Clearly not. That's why I said it was stupid.
Evil, not stupid. I'm a humanist, I don't believe in that kind of stupidity.