top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 52 points 3 weeks ago (12 children)

The greatest argument against the Second Amendment is that its biggest supporters aren’t lifting a single trigger finger to stop fascism.

Cosplayers. The whole lot of them.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (7 children)

    This feels like a deadly misunderstanding of both the people who you're referring to (they're getting exactly the thing they want why would they try to stop fascism), and also the argument for why leftists should have been 2a the whole time.

    Like, don't let the desire to be correct pull you this far into the weeds. They will never care that they're hypocrites, they just want you dead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    why leftists should have been 2a the whole time.

    I agree that leftists should support gun ownership, but I deliberately do not support the Second Amendment, or any part of the US Constitution, for the simple reason that the document is part of the law in AmeriKKKa. Even in a theoretical instance where the text of the law is not problematic (which the Second Amendment is; it is a poorly written sentence, even by the standards of the time), the fact that it is law gives the text a role in the maintenance of the various hierarchies the State imposes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    Fair. I'm also of the unironic and literal "arm the homeless" leaning. How would you have wanted gun rights worded if it were up to you to write the law?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (2 children)

    I would simply not write the law, since I am an anarchist and I oppose laws.

    As a point of agreement within a freely associated anarchist community...it would depend on the needs of the people. Like there might be communities where the members freely agree to not own guns, or communities where members freely agree to all own guns, or something else.

    Personally, my preferred approach would be to share gun ownership, maintenance, training, and regular usage collectively within a small community of a couple hundred people at most. The hope would be that the community is small and safe and we all know and trust each other, so we wouldn't need to carry guns all the time around each other. But then if we needed to defend ourselves against tyrants, we would collectively be armed to the fucking teeth and trained to use these tools. But I would never want to impose this approach.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Hmmm. That feels like the worst interpretation of anarchism, like kind of how non-anarchists have always just assumed anarchism means "no rules I do what I want". You know some laws can be for enforcing a lack of hierarchy right? Hell you can run a court in an unhierarchical way.

    But if you're uninterested in putting anything down on paper, I get it. You're basically describing what should happen anyway. I just personally would want that enshrined in a societally agreed upon text that can be referred to when defending my rights in ways that don't employ violence

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

    But if you're uninterested in putting anything down on paper, I get it.

    Nah, that's not the part I'm objecting to at all. I'm not against rules, written rules, or rules having serious consequences. I'm against, specifically, rules backed by State power. I am using "rules backed byi State power" as a definition for law.

    You know some laws can be for enforcing a lack of hierarchy right

    So under my definition, rules can be used to facilitate a lack of hierarchy...but not law by my definition, because the State inevitably imposes the dominant hierarchies.

    If you are operating under a definition of "law" that does not require State power... then I suspect we disagree on definitions and not what we mean to say through them. Sorry if this is too pedantic, but I really do think that understanding each other's definitions is super important. In an academic work I would simply begin by stating a list of definitions from a minimum of primitive objects...but people would find that weird on a casual web forum 😆.

    By "rules" I mean "points of agreement which are required to freely associate with a group". So then, consequences can be baked into the agreement. For example, you could put in the agreement "We agree that if any member discharges their firearm in a dangerous way, they must surrender their firearm immediately and retake the firearms safety class.", or something like that depending on community needs.

    I just personally would want that enshrined in a societally agreed upon text that can be referred to when defending my rights in ways that don't employ violence

    Me too. I just don't believe that it is useful to name such a text a "law". I believe it is useful to make a distinction between "a rule" and "a law".

  • source
  • parent
  • Broke: The Second Amendment is bad because guns are bad.

    Woke: The Second Amendment is bad because gun owners are not stopping fascism like what the framers 🤮 promised.

    Bespoke: The Second Amendment is irrelevant to anarchist theory and praxis, and it should be burned to ash with the settler-colonial AmeriKKKan Constitution and all its defenders. Guns are useful tools for fighting oppression, but must not be fetishized.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

    They also love to wave the American flag and screech about freedom. As long as their chosen propaganda outlet is telling them everything is fine and the brown people are getting a boot on their neck they don't care. My only hope is when these dumb mother fuckers can no longer afford groceries or gas they might start to wake up. But then their propaganda will tell them it is somehow the democrat's fault and throw in the word "woke" and they won't question it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)
  • [–] 19 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    I still cant tell if that's how big his face was or if this image has had it enlarged

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    I dunno it looks really natural to me. At least back in the Photoshop era, shrinking a face down on an angle like that would be hard to pull off (at least for me).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 3 weeks ago* (1 child)

    I find it really fun to repost satirical kirkaganda on facebook where I subtly shrink his face each time until someone notices.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 3 weeks ago

    The exception that proves the rule.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 3 weeks ago

    "Counting or not counting gang violence?"

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)
  • [–] 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Did they just subtlety decrease his face size in this? Epic.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    I see guns as a great way for the USA to remove the “conservatives.”

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    if you are looking for an image, it was probably deleted.

    Wise words, wise words

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 3 weeks ago

    Ya got me there.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

    Kirk's shooter is all but forgotten now (which took like a week btw), probably facing execution which I bet was super worth it

    Kirk himself after getting Kirk'd simply got replaced in 0.1s with other rapedwinger

    all it did was create a meme for larpers to laugh at

    adventurism sure is effective huh

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

    Pretty apt criticism tbh. Everyone likes to joke but for that week the shooter's motivations were the world's most fiercely contested game of hot potato. "Not ours, not ours, we condemn violence!"

    I think about that now every time somebody brings up Teh Ebic Revolution and how it's coming any day now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago

    fuck he kinda has a point tho

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago

    I always think someone edited his facial festures with a shrink tool to make it small on his large head.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    We all have the power to make someone happy. Some of us do it by entering the room, while some do it by leaving.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    If You Go Left Enough You Get Your Guns Back

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    He’s got a point

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago

    "If you are looking for an image, it was probably deleted"

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    In an alternate dimension he is rocking out with Macklemore on stage fighting for Palestinian rights

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›