I believe if everyone who was against the current oligarchy started placing guillotine stickers everywhere, like you might for a favorite band, people would feel less isolated in their distaste for the current system.
And in an ideal world those who the guillotines are for might realize just how much they are in the minority.
Where’s my fucking Guillotine emoji?!
🛠️⚖️💣
Best I can do right now 🤷🏻
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠿⠟⠛⢉⣉⡀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠘⠛⠋⣉⣁⣤⣤⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠿⠛⠋⠉⠁⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠘⠛⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠉⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢈⣉⣉⣉⡁⠀⠀⠀⢈⣉⣉⣉⡁⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣷⣤⣤⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠿⠟⠛⢉⣉⡀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠘⠛⠋⣉⣁⣤⣤⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠿⠛⠋⠉⠁⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠘⠛⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠉⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢈⣉⣉⣉⡁⠀⠀⠀⢈⣉⣉⣉⡁⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣷⣤⣤⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
I like this :)
All guillotines are equal. But some are more equal than others.
I had a conversation with a guy who I thoght was on my level. Stand up for racism, stand up for the minority, action things yourself instead of waiting.
Turns out he thinks the Palestinians are racist, the minority was being an ant masker, and his actions are… Well a rsult of those ideas.
Same ideologies different outcomes.
What is an ant masker?
“anti-masker” probably.
I’m confused about why people think the guillotine is cool. Feeling entitled to lynch people who you see as the enemy is the symbol of being a psychopath, not a symbol of social justice.
Most peoples’ first step isn’t lynching. This serves as a symbol for what is to come if they don’t stop their incessant greed. They should be afraid.
So you’re OK with someone putting a guillotine on your lawn if they disagree with you?
Because that’s what you’re advocating.
Again, tell me how you’ve never read a word about the French Revolution.
i think people exaggerate. i don’t think they really want political violence, but i could be wrong.
edit: i mean, if they really mean it then we have a lot more progress to cover as far as becoming the utopia that most people want. please don’t misconstrue my point. we should want to go forward not backward as it sometimes seems.
There is already a ton of political violence occurring.
Of course there is. But we must do our parts to try and end it. Idk how though, I am new to politics but I know enough to know what’s right and wrong, imo.
I mean, if I was murdering innocent people, poisoning others, preventing people from accessing medicine for easily treatable diseases, and raping children with the express backing of the government, I’d hope for the love of God somebody put a guillotine on my lawn with full intent to use it.
To answer your question succinctly: Yes.
Spoiler alert: The correct answer to the paradox of tolerance is specifically NOT unlimited tolerance.
We aren’t talking about people that don’t like the same flavor of ice cream we do. We’re talking about people activing seeking to harm us or the people we love in various ways. And who are currently succeeding in doing so.
You’re arguing in bad faith by painting with a mega broad brush.
It’s not a disagreement, they are killing and raping children, starving people, killing millions in wars, destroying the habitability of the planet, etc.
They will not stop until the are arrested or dead, and I’ve never seen them get arrested.
It’s this ☝️
We literally saw two American citizens executed by ICE and there has been zero accountability.
They shot Alex Pretti in the back of the head for protecting an American citizen and no one is in jail.
People on here complaining about guillotine stickers are detached from the current reality.
Feeling entitled to lynch people who you see as the enemy
What if they are the enemy? You know, sometimes other people ARE your enemy. Typically when they support harming you or ones you love. Harm can include physical harm, like masked agents shooting people in the face or beating and maiming protestors. It can include removing rights, like human rights over your own body or your right to privacy, or your right to due process. Harm can include representatives they elect withholding aid to states that didn’t support them. Harm can include removing or crippling social services that have been proven to save many, many lives on an annual basis.
These are all things that are actually happening. Sooooooo…
Anyone else notice a sudden uptick in guillotine related content over the past week or so?
It’s been steadily growing for a while now, seems like resistance in general is high in the zeitgeist lately.
People are getting angrier every day because no one is holding real criminals who harm millions, accountable.
In fact it’s being enabled by all levels of government.
We are angry because regular citizens are being called terrorist because they attend protest or try to defend themselves against out-of-control cops and ice “agents”.
We are angry that data centers have more protection and rights than a regular human citizen.
We are angry our neighbors, friends, family are being dragged out of the homes, cars, or just off the street. Beaten. Held in gulags and starved and tortured for months , illegally. And no one is stopping it.
We are angry our taxes are being used to murder innocent people in other countries in some of the most inhumane and horrendous ways. Children burned alive. Men and women beaten and raped. And raped by dogs in israel prisons.
That’s our money doing those things instead of being used to care for our citizens.
Not even getting into bombing schools and hospital of innocent people. Whoes only crime is being on land with a resource our president and his buddies want.
We are angry about those things and so many more.
The people responsible should be grateful it’s a guillotine and not a chainsaw.
Guillotine is fast clean death. They don’t deserve that.
I mean why not just start building them all over the place
One outside every town hall and posh golf club.
When I think of guillotine, I think of the French revolution, which is about as far from a common man protest as you can get. It’s a good example of minority rule and authoritarianism
Well. Yes and no. It actually started off good.
Did you know it was women who initiated it and then after they got control then the men came in and pushed them out and put Napoleon in charge.
There were a couple more steps in between, with most of them ranging from “awful” to “sickeningly awful.” But yeah, acknowledged that the initial intention was noble. Unfortunately, that’s not what ended up being the vast majority of the revolution
We should popularize using the guillotine
That’s one way to build solidarity, there are countless others and we should be using as many as possible, as quickly as possible.
The guillotine was primarily used against innocent commoners during the French Revolution, and the last guy guillotined was the guy who had been in charge of deciding who to guillotine next. If anything, the guillotine symbolizes the fact if you normalize political violence against your enemies then you also normalize it against yourself.
No. The last one was [this gent] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamida_Djandoubi), in 1977, for ‘kidnapping, torture, and murder’.
The last guy guillotined *during the French Revolution
Ok, my bad then. But, anyway, that fact didn’t ring a bell at all, and a quick web search doesn’t get me anything, and it sounds a bit like a made up folk tale, honestly. So if you could get me some source on that last feller guillotined during the French Revolution it would be great.
Not sure if he was 100% the final person guillotined during the French revolution but I’m pretty sure they’re referring to Robespierre. I thought he was pretty well known but idk maybe that’s just because I watched a load of nerdy shit growing up.
It’s Maximilien Robespierre, head of the Committee of Public Safety during the Reign of Terror.
My point is less about him being the literal last person executed by guillotine, and more about his execution by guillotine marking the end of a period of mass executions by guillotine, largely because he had been the leading champion of mass executions by guillotine.
A spiral of unmeasured violence against everything I don’t like will work this time. I promise.
facts.
The last guy guillotined was a POS who deserved it
Exactly, people fantasise the idea of quickly disposing of political enemies (for a higher goal, of course) but never really read about what that leads to.
Once you normalise killing people who are the wrong people, guess what happens.
Yes yes. And Guy Fawkes was a religious nutter and completely unsuccessful at his goals.
Symbols change.
This seems fundamentally different because a mask of some guy does not itself contain information about what that guy was all about, but a guillotine is very unambiguously a machine for efficient and gruesome executions.
and what part of, “machine for efficient and gruesome executions” implies, “political violence between ruling factions and definitely not commoners rising up”?
It doesn’t matter because the method is inherently a bad idea because
if you normalize political violence against your opponents then you also normalize it against yourself.
is just the truth whether or not anyone remembers it, and the symbol is inseparable from the method.
Nope. Purely wrong. The answer to the paradox of tolerance is to only use violence in defense.
Yes, that is also a grey zone to many perspectives, but things rapidly become clear if you expand the scope of the question… For an example: Trump’s ignorant, braindead policies on immigration and “sanctuary cities” DOES make sense … if you’re an isolated dipshit desperately trying to climb the unfair social ladder Trump and his ilk constructed… Though if you expand it to the scope of humanity and all the gains we see when people (let alone disparate cultures) work together, his policies are a HUGE loss.
Spoilers: If someone wants to go out of their way to kill someone who will only get violent in defense, that means that they want to ATTACK those people.
Ok, but guillotines are inherently infrastructure for mass killings, that is itself only “defense” from a detached and twisted perspective that renders the distinction between defense and attack meaningless. That the scope of its use rapidly expanded in the French Revolution is just naturally how it goes, once you’re at the point of such mass killings as a primary tool “tolerance” is fucked no matter how you slice it and it cannot be the case that those methods are sincerely working in its favor.
This isn’t to say that any form of self defense is going to go that way, but I think the form of violence represented by guillotines always will.
lol have fun on your moral high ground while the world dies around you.
It was normalized against us decades ago
When political violence is normalized on one side already, why shouldn’t the other fight back?
I swear the conditioning is real with all these folks :(
“This guy is literally stabbing me repeatedly and currently ripping my intestines out, but if I try to stop him or defend myself in any way shape or form then I’m stooping to their level and that’s worse than dying.”
For fucks sake…
I think because you don’t have the historical context about what the guillotine lead to you are misunderstanding what they said.
Because the cycle of violence always escalates and is ultimately self-defeating.
So defending yourself is self-defeating?
Interesting take…
No, that would be a most uncharitable interpretation of what I’ve been saying (and rather a loaded question.)
You’re still simply wrong about political violence never working.
Love it or hate it, through the vast majority of history, it has accomplished tons.
It has also occasionally backfired or otherwise made the situation worse.
For whatever reason, you want to focus on the latter and call it “always.”
The problem that I’m getting at is that it works both ways, not that it never works.
It’s a gamble, to be sure.
But the gamble of inaction and apathy isn’t working very well either; I’m sure you can point to just as many horrifying historic examples of when doing little to nothing didn’t work out.
All that to say, “Sometimes things don’t work out” is true but not very helpful unless you intend to feed apathy, at which point it’s a highly effective strategy.
Violence is inescapable.
Do you eat food? That is an act of violence.
Not all acts of violence use physical force; not all uses of physical force are acts of violence.
Did the food consent to being harvested?
No, because no food can, other than arguably humans, but that’s usually illegal.
I would count killing and eating an animal as a non-violent, physically forceful act, all else being equal. I realize that puts me at odds with many vegetarians and vegans, but in the context of violence against other human beings I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
Violence is any act which removes the rights from another being, this includes the right to live, this includes the right to autonomy.
Even vegans commit violence, plants can feel, and don’t consent to being eaten. (Gets a bit funny when it comes to stuff where it’s not actually alive though, just a vector to spread seeds)
Edit: bad internet connection made this post 3 times
Does it though? Read back through history
I mean in the case of the guillotine it literally is. St Just ended up guillotined himself, having sent hundreds of people to their deaths as one of the guillotine’s most zealous proponents.
There’s never been a successful revolution?
That depends on how you define success. It also depends on how you define revolution. If the French Revolution can be defined as ending when Napoleon crowned himself Emperor, then I think that qualifies as a failed revolution.
But there’s been successful revolutions, so the cycle of violence does not always escalate.
The cycle will escalate until it is broken. How long it runs before it gets broken might be a useful part in defining “successful revolution”: the successful ones break the cycle of violence as early as possible.
Violent revolutions have a huge risk of producing prolonged violence, authoritarianism, or other disastrous outcomes, even if they succeed in overthrowing the old regime.
On the other hand here are some successful non-violent revolutions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_revolution
Also watch out for selection bias - we tend to remember revolutions that became enormous historical events. Check out this table of pitiful forgotten revolutions and note how many “Suppression of the rebellion” there are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peasant_revolts
Holy liberal brainrot. Did you just seriously link the wikipedia article for “color revolutions”, a series of CIA-backed counterrevolutionary and deeply reactionary insurgencies, as a list for successful non-violent ‘revolutions’?
All of those color revolutions had massive detrimental effects on the population, skyrocketing inequality, destroying decades of progress in women’s liberation (the ex-Yugo regions for example still aren’t close to catching back up), and destroying education systems and economies, forcing them to sell out to international capital.
So how exactly did they produce “better institutional outcomes” than actual Socialist revolutions? Easier to exploit on the world market? Better startup culture? Lmao
Is the CIA in the room with us right now?
On August 23, 1989, a momentous event unfolded that would forever leave its mark on history. Two million people joined hands, creating an unbroken human chain that spanned over 600 kilometres, linking the capital cities of Vilnius in Lithuania, Tallinn in Estonia, and Riga in Latvia. This awe-inspiring display of unity and determination became famously known as “The Baltic Way.” It was a peaceful protest against the illegal Soviet occupation and also one of the earliest and longest unbroken human chains in history.
The Baltic Way was more than just a physical connection; it was a profound political demonstration for freedom.
Remarkably, within just six months of this transformative protest, on March 11, 1990, Lithuania declared its independence, becoming the first of the Soviet Republics to do so.
You don’t even know what you’re talking about, conflating apples and oranges. The Baltic independence movements aren’t referred to as color revolutions, those happened in the 2000s in Yugoslavia, Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan.
And of course, something cannot be the result of foreign involvement, awful racial-nationalist thought that has plagued the Baltics for ages (and still does), and malevolent capital interests if lots of people are holding hands, that much is clear.
Just make sure you finish the fight
Sure that’s a fair criticism, but it was a symbol of anger the common man had with the nobility. Political violence is already on our streets. ICE has murdered people in the street.
Politely asking for brown shirts to stop abducting families will never work.
Sure, the guillotine in practice wasn’t used the way it would be/is used as a symbol. But as a symbol it current represents the working class revolting against the rich. That sentiment isn’t a bad one, it’s desperately needed at this time.
They’ve given no room for peaceful resolution. The next step is the natural result.
But as a symbol it current represents the working class revolting against the rich.
Only to those who are ignorant of its history. And you know what they say about people who are ignorant of history.
I disagree. You can be knowledgeable about its history while still recognizing its new found symbolic meaning.
Just like language, symbols change over time. If I say “goodbye”, I am not telling you " God be with you" as per the original meaning.
Being stubborn about using the original meaning of things isn’t helpful, it’s ignorant of the current meaning.
Don’t forget the history of the first time the brownshirts were defeated. It wasn’t through peaceful means.
Being stubborn about using the original meaning of things isn’t helpful, it’s ignorant of the current meaning.
OK. In this context, what does the guillotine symbolize if not the mass execution of political opponents?
But as a symbol it current represents the working class revolting against the rich. That sentiment isn’t a bad one, it’s desperately needed at this time.
revolting against the rich
But a guillotine is not a weapon of war. It’s not even something that the powerless can use against the powerful. Quite the opposite, actually.
Which makes the guillotine is a terrible symbol for a revolution. Not only is the symbolism ahistorical, but the actual history directly contradicts the supposed symbolism. The modern people who invoke the guillotine as a symbol of revolution are making the exact same mistake that the French Revolutionaries made.
You can be knowledgeable about its history while still recognizing its new found symbolic meaning.
Just like language, symbols change over time. If I say “goodbye”, I am not telling you " God be with you" as per the original meaning.
As a side note, was it a mistake to bomb, kill, and invade nazi Germany?
If violence was not the answer there, what was the answer?
MAGA doesn’t understand, or respect history, so it’s still useful symbol to scare them. We don’t want to take our ultimate threat against them off the table. After all, they’ll never remove the threat to murder us all, so we shouldn’t either. When the time comes, we don’t HAVE to deploy it, but we should always keep the option, in case of worse case scenarios.
That’s an interesting angle. I had thought the OP was talking about billionaires and oligarchs, a few thousand people tops. But you’re talking about an entire political bloc consisting of tens of millions of people.
No, I’m not, I’m talking about the High Command, but it doesn’t hurt if the Sociopathic Oligarchs worry that we’ll apply it to their families, too.
As for the rank & file, they’re just tough talking cowards. They’ll evaporate the second their loudmouth leaders start paying the price for their treason.
deleted by creator
and when that’s not enough
We don’t need all of that iron age tech. Just go biblical and smash a rock down on their heads.
Tell me you don’t know anything about the French Revolution without saying so
Ok.
Worked just fine to scare off those AI dweebs in Oregon. Why not use it to symbolize that now?
Symbols can change over time and I think that 230 years is plenty of time for it to have changed
I could get behind a “Normalize bullying the Espstein Class” one. I’ve also seen a guillotine meme renaming it as “Guwutine”, which was funny AF. Memetic guillotine has potential.
Not just the guillotine, but also the machete.
I don’t know, I’m kind of beholden to the gallows myself. Less gore, more spectacle. And a historical punishment for treason, specifically.
Let’s not pervert the word “treason;” it’s a very specific term.
Meanwhile, the guillotine was used in this exact context for this exact purpose.
“Treason is the crime of betraying one’s own country, typically by trying to overthrow the government or helping a hostile foreign enemy.”
Ignoring all facts and common sense to elevate and empower a single man who behaves like a tyrant, abuses his powers, violates the Constitution, vilifies millions of Americans, and has made it clear he isn’t a fan of democracy is a betrayal of the United States of America and its core values. That makes Donald Trump, every single Republican voter, and Republican member of Congress a traitor to the United States of America.
Reminder that Donald Trump instigated an attempt to violently overthrow the government and thousands of his followers took part.
If Donald Trump, the members of Congress who allow him free reign to do whatever he wants, and the citizens who voted for him AFTER he incited an insurrection and subsequently PARDONED the insurrectionists doesn’t amount to treason, then the word itself should simply be erased from our vocabulary.
As I already said and you already replied to, “insurrection” is a better word to describe 1/6.
The last three paragraphs of your comment appear to just be virtue signaling, maybe because you assume I disagree with you.
How about insurrection AND treason?
It’s not virtue signalling. It’s explaining why Donald Trump, Republican congress members, and Republican voters are traitors and why traitor is an appropriate term for them. Whether you agreed or not is kind of beside the point.
Yeah but you see how you’re making an argument for why we should call something a “bug” instead of a “spider?”
I like being specific. Yes, the broader term technically works. You don’t have to convince me of that.
Jan. 6 was treason.
Barely related, but sure, we can talk about 1/6.
I would use the term “insurrection” because treason is too broad and more typically associated with helping an enemy wage war against your country.
You see, the man and his ilk have sworn an oath to act in the interest of the country and its people. What they’re doing is treason because they are betraying the public and the nation. As for whether there is a conspiracy with foreign powers in play, we don’t know for sure. But there are worrying signs, such as his private conversations with Putin off the record.
Treason incorporates more than helping an enemy wage war against your country.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/treason
Both Mariam Webster and Cambridge defines it as trying to overthrow the government. That’s what was attempted in jan 6.
So your point is that an insurrection is a type of treason?
Yeah I’m not a fan of the types of punishment for treason that don’t include pain.
