this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2026
794 points (96.6% liked)

People Twitter

10110 readers
1764 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] samara@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

don’t want to be fucking led

Unless you are going out there and campaigning or operationally actually doing some-fucking-thing; you absolutely do want someone to lead and fulfill your desires. If you personally are not making it happen then you want someone else to take the lead on it.

You are allowed to have a belligerent sense of independence; just don't fool yourself.

[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

If I pay a mechanic to fix my car, that ain't them leading. If I hire a politician to enact my will, that isn't them leading. You don't have to be the one personally doing the job.

[–] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I do not in fact want to be lead.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Do you take charge in effecting political/societal change for yourself (and your community)?

Or do you disagree with the other guy's requirements for what constitutes someone who does not want to be led?

You kinda just said "no."

[–] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

'Take charge'. Explain what you mean by this.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 0 points 48 minutes ago* (last edited 46 minutes ago) (1 children)

As examples (as "taking charge" can take multiple forms across mutiple goals): table and/or moderate meetings to come to consensus on goals, coordinate members for coordinated actions toward social goals, source funding for operations if funds are needed, speak on behalf of your group (or coordinate group messaging) toward other groups. To name a few generic things. Specifics depend on what you want done.

To try and sum it up: "taking charge" is providing impetus, and potentially aligning community power, toward making headway to some social/political goal.

[–] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 45 minutes ago (1 children)

English is not a language of domination and hierarchy you need to be careful to avoid expressing that.

You might say 'initiative' if you were being careful and conscious.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 1 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

I don't know what exactly you mean by "English is not a language of domination and hierarchy" or how that really relates to what I was saying or what I originally asked you. "Taking charge" is a extremely common idiom in English.

I will concede that "take initiative" is a more neutral phrase, but you have turned to nitpicking my diction, even after I spent another full comment explicating the meaning and intention of the original question.

So it is my turn to ask what you mean by sidestepping my question? If you are uninterested in answering the question, just say so. I have done with someone else in this very post. But don't think you can confuse me with literary legerdemain. You don't answer questions by saying "you could've phrased it better."

[–] ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 29 minutes ago* (last edited 28 minutes ago)

Sorry was originally writing that sarcastic because I assume nobody is literate and I should at least be having fun.

If I completely rewrite what you asked and assume the best, sure in some cases. Its not exactly what I want, but close enough. But you didn't actually write what I'm responding to here, so...

[–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml -2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Elected officials are public servants, not leaders and should be following the will of the people, not telling the people what that will should be.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

I was going to bring in something I saw in a different thread but then I noticed you were already there.

You seem convinced that "leaders" are necessarily authoritarian. I do not believe that, so there's not going to be much point to this.

[–] Nonconfrontational@lemmy.ml -2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)