this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2026
798 points (94.1% liked)

Political Memes

12630 readers
558 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) 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.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CardboardDecoy@lemmy.world 58 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I feel like this all ignored the complete bastardization of any sense of language or definition in American politics. None of these words mean anything and engaging in it is playing party to the fucked up games people have invented to delay any sort of growth or action.

"Neoliberal conservativeism" was a thing. They're all nazis now. 'Liberals' is a slur against anyone who isn't left enough. 'Liberalism' is the blood-shy self-blind median our parents and grandparents wanted for us so we didn't have to watch our friends die in imperialists wars in Asia. Libertarianism was supposed to be a rejection of any of this and got coopelted by some of the most evil freaks in the system. The Left represents the most meaningful and poplist messaging we can mannage and is still consumed by bickering from people who can't walj and chew gum or breathe at the same time.

Stop trying to argue the labels.

[–] cuerdo@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

The truth is dead. There is no democracy, there is no politics. Just rich people throwing bones.

USA is just an oligopoly.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 8 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

And they're using a.i. to make it a sloppy oligopoly.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Top comment:

Stop trying to argue the labels.

Rest of comments arguing labels.

But, I think we need a banner to gather under, don't we? Maybe it's "proletariat", but not many people know what that means. Your typical American family hasn't a clue. Most of us aren't arguing about labels on social media. Most of us are posting TikToks of our dogs, and watching Mr. Beast or Cocomelon(?), apparently. And, whoever-the-hell Charli Grace D'Amelio is. They know "socialist bad" and capitalism is money and they like money. They know Rs on the ballot let them have guns and promise lower taxes.

Man, looking at Nextdoor where I live is disheartening.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Ah, the Great American lie. Well one of them. The idea that American liberalism is somehow different. And yet when you actually start examining it it looks exactly the same. I mean you just said that liberalism in America is Anti-Imperialist and anti-war. If you've never opened a history book I suppose you might have come to that conclusion. How else you do it I have no fucking idea.

[–] CardboardDecoy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

If you actually read what I said it's what out parents and grandparents wanted to achieve in lieu of imperialism and war. They were wrong because they couldn't face the truth that the country their parents died for in WW2 would go on the put a boot on the neck of any country that tries to challenge their one sided control over worldwide economics.Then they died in droves in Korea and Vietnam for an ideal they just couldn't believe mislead them.

If you actually read it, of course.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] krellor@fedia.io 40 points 2 weeks ago (17 children)

I get that these terms get tossed around without people knowing what they mean, and I'm not against language evolving. But liberalism was never really intended to describe wherever you are on a progressive-conservative spectrum.

Pulling from Wikipedia, but it's a similar definition in most texts.

Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property, and equality before the law.

Classical liberals just tended to look progressive compared to people who weren't liberals, because, well, read the definition. The countervailing force to liberalism is authoritarianism. It's more of a government legitimacy and structure philosophy.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The definition of liberalism changed a lot, especially thanks to right-wing entryism.

Words lose their meaning over time. Once "alt-girl" meant a woman specifically into alternative rock, and not an umbrella-term also involving metalheads, goths, punks, etc. Once cuck meant someone with a cuckoldry fetish, now it's a pejorative used against people who (at least supposed to) bend over and do nothing in situations really bad for them. Once LARP meant Live Action Role Playing, now it used to demean "fake" fans.

Liberalism once stood for liberty, equality, and paternity. But paternity stood in the way of capital, so liberalism split into three main groups: socialism, moderate conservatism (neoliberalism, classical liberalism, you know the rest), and social democracy.

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

For the cuck one, it's not so much that they bend over and do nothing, it's that that actively invite it. That's the parallel to the fetish - just doing nothing but also not consenting would be adultery. Consenting and facilitating it is what makes someone a cuckold.

The LARP comment when I've seen used as a pejorative is mostly in "stolen valour" type situations. For example, ICE officers LARP as real cops, cops LARP as soldiers, etc. It's use as an insult is to imply that someone is pretending to be/do something they're not and likely could never aspire to be.

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

What makes a progressivist changes depending on the society they are in.

When liberalism was first invented, it was extremely progressive. People that deny it today are extremely regressive. But yes, it's not progressive anymore, it's just the bare minimum.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I really like this way of looking at it.

One thing though, the countervailing force to liberalism is illiberalism. Authoritarians can be liberal even if in theory they oppose individual rights. This is seen in liberal autocracy and ordoliberalism.

[–] krellor@fedia.io 4 points 2 weeks ago

That's fair, illiberalism is the proper countervailing force here, it just has some Venn diagram overlap with authoritarianism where the latter curtails political freedoms. It is easy to conflate them!

[–] impairedimperator@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

How do you oppose individual rights while supporting the individual right to self determination?

Liberal autocracy is an oxymoron, unless you define liberalism along the progressive-conservative spectrum. Which is what the capitalists and autocrats and tankies would like you to do.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

I think you may be confusing authoritarianism and totalitarianism.

As some other people have pointed out liberalism can be across the spectrum and does not really define political leaning.

I think you perhaps hold liberalism to higher ideals when in reality it has always been the propaganda the wealthy use to obscure their actual goals.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 17 points 2 weeks ago (15 children)

It's 2026 and any talk of political labels outside an academic setting is useless.

Hitler wasn't a Socialist; North Korea isn't a Democratic Republic; the Chinese Communist Party has numerous billionaires.

Pick actual candidates and vote for them without tying yourself in knots over what they call themselves.

Second, stop pretending there's some giant 'Left' majority in the US. Mamdani won NYC with 51% of the vote; Harris got 65%. She got more total votes and a higher percentage than the guy who called himself a Socialist.

I like Mamdani, and I voted for him, but if he gets re-elected it'll be because he's a savvy pol, not because of some Left wave.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Judging from the hammer and sickle, OOP thinks North Korea is a Democratic Republic, and the billionaires in the CCP are all self-made unlike the ones in the GOP...

[–] BillCheddar@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

He won 51% of a three-way race, which means moderate Democrats and independent voters had another option that wasn't a Republican, and he still kicked both of their asses with a majority.

I support what you're trying to say but your argument is built around a very disingenuous framing of the election outcome.

A better argument is that Mamdani won DESPITE being a known socialist. He won despite the tag. Just like he won despite his religion and name.

Understanding why he won despite those things is how we can best use his election to inform our other candidate and voting choices.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's a big conundrum:

  • On one side, most people when told actual policies which are generally considered left-wing (say, Free Education) agree with them
  • On the other side, most people don't have the attention span to read long lists of policies (hands up anybody who ever read the entire electoral program of even just one candidate in an election they voted in) so even the most well-intentioned politicians end up using short political terms with vague-ish definitions which are easily subverted, to describe their own set of policies or those of others.

So we end up with Liberal this, Socialist that and if you try and get down to tightly defined nitty-gritty details of their meaning, no two people fully agree on the definitions.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The liberalism that is practiced in the US is neoliberalism, the same thing practiced throughout the developed world, and we don't see ideological movements in power specifically because business interests have historically intervened to overthrow those governments in order to install friendlier regimes that let them plunder natural resources.

But then neoliberalism ultimately favors property rights over human rights, and as Marx observes in Das Kapital the owner class will influence the courts to favor property and business over the public good. It'll also hack law to gain influence over the government to deregulate and protect the power of the wealthiest plutocrats and companies.

Democracies and leninist economies have existed. They just get put down before they have much of a chance to flourish. Even Wilson favored monarchists over communists.

In the US, we can't imagine anything other than capitalism because of over a century of propaganda inserted into our primary schooling. That campaign has only gotten more and more conservative and now MAGA ideology is taught in class. This was deliberate, as the US education system was always regarded as an instrument of control and worker indoctrination.

[–] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Liberalism, in all of its forms current and historic, has always valued property over human lives. Property is the guiding principle of liberalism.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 14 points 2 weeks ago

Neoliberals are right wing

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Thinking of the world as two directions is literal one dimensional thinking. The real problem is a society willing to operate with just one neural weight.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] veryblandusername@fedinsfw.app 7 points 2 weeks ago

True leftism doesn't threaten a damn thing because they can't stop killing each other long enough to agree to start killing the right.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago

Capitalists are like cucks for billionaires. Think of the billionaire as a shark and the capitalists as Remora fish. /s

[–] HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

Yes, that's what we need now more than ever as we approach the general election in the US: More in-fighting amongst anti-fascists.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

This submission is exactly the divisive shit fascists love to see. Congratulations.

Fascists love people who bitch about boomers - they ignore all the young people coming up conservative and all the old progressives.

Fascists love people who bitch about various kinda of left-wing or pseudo-left-wing groups and ADORE threads where people argue over what those terms even mean. It all distracts from uniting against fascism.

Fascists love the "both sides' bullshit - especially because it contains enough grains of truth that it is very compelling (like a lof ot their propaganda, they sometimes raise some good points that get lost in the fascism) - because ti causes people not to vote. Mostly progressives.

Fascists love this thread.

I fucking don't.

[–] VinegarChunks@lemmus.org 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I’ve done my share of bitching about boomers but damn it you’re right.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JargonWagon@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Brainsploosh@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Liberalism is therefore a right of center, a.k.a. conservative, ideal.

When Liberalism requires and promotes directing money towards a commons used to lift and/or equalise people in need, that's where it's starting to touch upon left of center.

[–] SwissArmyKazoo@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Neoliberalism is a fascist coercion deployment and the imperial Jingoism to Socialism's more sentimental Maoism

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

Not true but it's why Marx saw socialism as the necessary intermediary.

[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

Liberals share one central feature with fascists; they both support private property rights. So if liberals have to choose between socialism and fascism they will always choose the latter.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

This is supported by history.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Fluffy_Ruffs@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Sweet meme.

load more comments
view more: next ›