- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
[green, speaking, looking smug]
Okay, hear me out, here’s the plan…
We go full apathy, basically we let capitalism fully spiral out into fascism. Once it’s done, people will rise up and the system will collapse under its own weight. From its ashes, with our help, a better society will rise. This is how we win.
[we now see that green is tied up in front of a bleak wall, along with a group of other people, being aimed at by a firing squad of characters in fascist uniforms]
[green, smiling] OK?
[blue, pissed] Dude…
You must log in or # to comment.
As a Millennial this is basically how I feel about Gen Z. Why are they so apathetic regarding everything? If anyone gets passionate about anything because they want something done about the rise of fascism, you get labeled as “crashing out”! It’s annoying as fuck!
My friends just say I’m crazy and I’m on the dark web for using Lemmy and telling them how bad google and fb are 😆 they dont believe anything I tell them.
As a millennial who remembers massive climate change and anti Iraq war protests I get it.
Trump was elected under millennials, not Z. Americans in general are apathetic - it’s a culture issue, not a generational one.
I see that difference extremely clearly now that I live in Finland.
“The youngest voters and those entering middle age tacked hard to the right. Gen X — which slightly favored president-elect Donald Trump with a one-point margin in 2020 — shifted 9 points toward Trump this cycle. Gen Z favored Vice President Kamala Harris by 11 points, compared to 24 points for President Joe Biden.
…
Gen Z’s big shift to the right wasn’t entirely unexpected. Teens were twice as likely to identify as more conservative than their parents compared to millennials 20 years ago, per a Gallup and Walton Family Foundation study conducted last fall.”
-Business Insider
Trump was elected under millennials *the first time.
And the second under both.
Not to mention, even your own thing shows they were still more “left” leaning (as left as you can get with establishment democrats at least) overall. But then again, you post from an unheard of source that then quotes the right wing business insider, so I’m not surprised you didn’t catch that their conclusion doesn’t make sense (Biden was the candidate up until literally a few months before the election, when it quickly swapped to Harris. 11 points in that context is quite high all things considered).
As a millennial, you should understand that there’s no coherent volition behind surplus objects like Gen Z. Do you remember how the US just added every muslim to the list of terrorists or how suddenly all single mothers in the UK became a parasite?
Stop crashing out… :)
No but I think its because of never ending negative things happening. People stop to care because they cant affect it.
Why are you generalizing a whole generation?
Advertising stupidity, the only reason anyone ever has.
deleted by creator
A lot of the far right is accelerationist. They’ve been hoping for a “race war” for many decades. Then there is the newer Effective Accelerationism/Network State/Dark Enlightenment stuff that the ultra wealthy seem to be into.
Wow…a race war would not go well for the far right.
When I hear “far right”, I think of middle aged angry white guys. We already HAD that war! At least in the united states…it was in the 1800s, and it did not go well for those who supported racial discrimination.
And that’s underselling the whole thing quite a bit.
Didn’t exactly go horribly for them either. Reconstruction ended early and a lot of concessions were made on behalf of “the economy” and “unifying the nation”.
They should have let Sherman finish what he started.
Yes and no, the confederates lost the war but their whitewashing of history has quite a bit of staying power to the point that states like West Virginia and Ohio who had massively supported the Union in the Civil War are now more likely neo confederates and agree with the south take on “the war of northern aggression” which they started by attacking federal forces and raiding federal weapons depots while backing out of the federal government allowing it to pass a law they cite as the reason they backed out of it, rather than it being able to pass because they backed out. Also the war still left separate but equal and racial discrimination on the books and the last chattel slave in the US was freed during world war 2. So what the south (Pro-confederate states) and Americans who swallowed their propaganda learned was that fighting a war without seeding the ground everywhere first with their point of view and taking over things from the inside, like they did under Wilson, arguably the worst US president of the 20th century, and Trump just took that playbook and took it farther than the public was ready for but still pushed and those special interest groups that supported him had the choice to renounce him and be reviled by both major political wings of the US or back him to the hilt while he destroys the US from within, because if you can’t get everything you want at least you can make sure nobody else gets anything either.
idk, I feel like in particular the arguments I’ve had advocating for UBI with people arguing against it from a left wing perspective, those arguments often tend to be basically accelerationist (that it would be bad to improve things for people in a way that enables the continued existence of capitalism) or at least gesture at that. And as others have pointed out, the right is even more outwardly accelerationist.
Aren’t all the Plantir people (well people with money high up) epushing for an accelerationist movement with their stuff? I would think the billionaires are serious is all. Mean it sounds freaking stupid to me but I don’t have the bullhorn that the people who have all our private data does is all. However with the US they’re using project 2025 as a starting point before they buy up everything after it breaks. Least that’s what it appears, mean the VP is picked, groomed and supported by Theil. Just have to let them break enough then swoop in and mould a society they wanted. It’s not something 99.99% of what people would want from what I can tell.
Perhaps I’m missing some subtly which I will say I haven’t really looked into the definitions a lot but I don’t think with current forces is as much of a strawman as it may seem is all. Though I don’t think people on that side would want the same outcome as Mr Green is all.
deleted by creator
Yea, the right wing aren’t destroying the system as people seem to claim. They are just moving it into the next stage of its logical evolution.
Fascism is Capitalism in decay. We have already reached Late Stage Capitalism, and now the Imperial boomerang is coming home. We did this to ourselves by not dismantling it sooner. We tried in the early 1900s with the communist and anarchist worker movements that occurred but then McCarthyism and the 2nd Red Scare really fucked everything up.
deleted by creator
This isn’t even the stupidest point of accelerationism. That’s the assumption that your personal utopia will emerge from the ashes, instead of something much worse.
The simple fact of the matter is that there is no path to “perfect” which doesn’t track through an infinite amount of “better” first.
I don’t think utopias are a bad idea in general, but if they somehow are only reachable by collapsing most of the current system before any groundwork can even be attempted… a form that can be developed in parallel and take over at some point makes much more sense.
Think about the transition and hopefully it doesn’t require nuclear war.
Reminds me of this meme:
Or this one:
Yeah the take plays against their point and into the hands of fascists. A common retort from “capitalists” goes “well why doesn’t your economic system compete on the free market? If it’s so good it will rise to the top.” You believing your ideology will defacto rise from a blank slate after society collapses lends credence to that argument. (Which is flawed in so many ways)
Obviously, we shouldn’t need to detail “villains bad” in media, but with so many of them having “from the ashes” plans, I’d like to see more heroes deconstructing their approach like this.
deleted by creator
“no serious political movement” my dude, statesian republicans are maybe not explicit
statesians[edit woah oaky maybe too many drugs] accelerationists but like, i’m gonna lose teeth because of them.and don’t say they aren’t serious because just because they’re dipshits, they’re still a major political party and killing people. that’s pretty damn serious.
This is exactly the problem. “Supporting policies that make things worse for the average person” is not the same thing as “accelerationism.” Some people are just wrong, or they have different motivations (like making them and their friends rich). If accelerationism just means making things worse, then everyone is an accelerationist to everyone who disagrees with them, it loses any real meaning.
There may be a handful of actual accelerationists in the party, but they’re mostly driven by material interests and a whole bunch of brainworms, not by some accelerationist strategy.
deleted by creator
they’re more advocating for destruction of everything because some of them believe they have to destroy the world before their god will return
When you lay it out like that it does sound quite idiotic doesn’t it?
deleted by creator
people will rise up
The line in the sand as to what’s acceptable has been redrawn so many times, if the people haven’t risen up by now, they never will. You’re stuck with the rancid orange colostomy bag until he either pops his clogs, or chooses to leave.
Oh, no. People will rise up eventually. It’s just a shame that most people turn out to be olympic athletes in mental gymnastics and delay the realization to the next generation(s).
If people are not actively starving they basically never rise up. That’s been true though all of History.
It takes SERIOUSLY major direct impact to people’s day to day life in meaningful ways to kick start a revolution.
Nope. Fascism is there to stay for the next decade regardless of what happens to Trump.
There is an economic calamity coming that most people alive have never witnessed and barely understand the magnitude of from their history books. Were probably 6 months to a year away from it, it really depends how much fertilizer is getting out of Hormuz right now.
That will be a turning point. Either people use that to come together and turn away from fascism or fascism cements itself. Either way, I predict much hardship in the foreseeable future.
Pretty much the same plan as the Republicans, right? They were all about burning it down but plenty of them are arriving at the “Dude!” stage.
This but socialism
Governments that raise up against a totalitarian regime in anger rarely end up in a peaceful and prosperous place if they succeed, see France, Lybia, Rome, the Soviet Union/Russian Empire, China every time, Japan (under the shogunate), Egypt (Arab spring), Sudan, Somalia, Assyria (7th century BCE between 612 and 609 BCE), and so many more.
Accelerationism is really dumb which is why it’s such a popular strawman.
Does someone have a different opinion? Well, it could be that different people have different ideas about how the world works as well as different priorities. But that’s all complicated and nuanced and forces you to contend with different perspectives. Instead, just assume that everyone has your perspective because it’s just inherently obvious to everyone, but some people are intentionally trying to make things worse because they’re stupid and evil.
Virtually no one is an actual accelerationist.
Yep very few actual believers but if you don’t support their “pragmatic” suggestions that throw billions under the bus they accuse you of this.
The real solution btw is just a better consensus mechanism in our electoral process in the form of STAR Voting.
It is quite literally that simple.
The lack of choice (as explained in Duverger’s Law) is what kills our politics and helps the media portray all political battles as us vs them and not “What shade out of a million shades of gray should this policy be?”.tl;dr - STAR Voting is quite literally a panacea for nearly all the extreme ills that plague our politics - even a large portion of “voting doesn’t matter so I won’t” apathy…because to vote “strategically” under STAR Voting is to just vote honestly and every vote matters. No revolution required - just a better electoral process. I’m happy to answer any questions.
deleted by creator
For the same reason they’re happy to burn the only habitable planet humans will ever have: they’re going to play with fire in search of optimal profit, even to their own eventual detriment.
People act like raw, naked, decayed capitalism is a totally stable system where all actors work perfectly together to rationally suppress the proletariat in perpetuity. But it’s not that. Capital has accumulated to the point of a handful of individuals butting heads over all of the earth’s resources.
There’s no longer a cabal of dozens of cartels coordinating in abstract lock step. There’s like 10 dudes that can meet in a room. Applying dialect-materialism to that is using Newtonian physics on a quantum scale.
Petty grudges and irrational emotions take control at that scale. A few of them get the idea that they can eat the others by leveraging the proletariat and all bets are off.
Will it certainly happen? Not necessarily. But more individuals have deposed through creative leveraging of legal mechanisms than those spontaneously pulled from their beds and shot. There’s no reason to not be prepared if the opportunity presents itself.
Sure, but only if you naively believe that electoralism is an acceptable system. Many, many anarchists would vehemently disagree with you though.
Someone do a version of the comic with this guy’s comment as the text of the first panel, please.
Hah! Well I took the comic to mean that the accelerationist gets exactly what he wanted and pays for it in the end when things go to hell.
Thing is if we implemented what I’m talking about (which is literally just a law about how we vote…we already have legislation that does this…we just amend it) there would be no upheaval.
The electorate would vote more honestly.
Campaigns would become more positive.
News media would become more policy focused.
There would be no firing squad - just a return to normal policy-focused (not party-focused) politics.
It would actually be quite boring.First time?
Okay, but capitalism dystopia is not going to look like that. In real capitalism, that wall will be covered in advertisements and motivation posters.
No need to market to you when they simply extract your labour and rent and you buy the swill that is cheapest to you.
Marketing is more than just selling products, it is a form of social manipulation and conditioning in the constant bombardment of information. It keeps the people not only buying your products but conditioning them to think that they need your products in the first place.
Advertisers will never go obsolete. They are too good at advertising themselves.
Me and who 😳
get shot rearing an ad for Amazon™ Bezz-box® rented apartments on Mars.
Once it’s done?
Facissm doesn’t end on its own. It needs to get pushed out.
What accerationists don’t realise is that the average liberal already knows the US is fascist and evil billionaires control everything. That average liberal wants change. But they aren’t doing anything, because they’re thinking “surely when it gets REALLY bad, people will rise up”. Just like the accelerationists. Accelerationists and liberals are the same group.
average liberal already knows the US is fascist
No. They always think the current moment is the exception and everything way very respectable and dignified historically.
That’s why you’ve got liberals venerating Reagan, Clinton, and Bush, having completely whitewashed the horror of those presidencial eras from their minds.
That is pure nonsense.
You aren’t going to find liberals venerating Reagan, Bush, and Clinton because those people only exist in your mind. They don’t exist in reality.
You aren’t going to find liberals venerating Reagan, Bush, and Clinton
How Democrats Came to Feel Nostalgic for George W. Bush
“Did we ever think we would see the day when we would say, ‘Please bring back George W. Bush’?” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said during an interview with Evan Smith last week. “We really did work together.”
Former Democratic Representative Katie Hill tweeted, “In a million years I never thought I’d be crying watching this, thinking how much better we’d all feel if Bush were president today. Wtf.”
Saying “we worked together” isn’t venerating JFC.
venerate /vĕn′ə-rāt″/
To regard with deep respect or reverence. synonym: revere. Similar: revere
Not even close to the same thing.
- That isn’t the same thing.
- Democrat does not equal liberal.
Do you have anything intellectually HONEST to add to the conversation, or are you done with this sophomoric attempt at propaganda?
Democrat does not equal liberal.
Oh, you scratched yours, didn’t you?
Nobody where I live has any respect left for the USA, except for fascists. Peter Dutton tried following the American model and he lost his seat. We hate your country.
Australia is American Plus.
Your county is doing everything the US does on steroids. It’s just too small for anyone outside the South Pacific to notice.
Albanese and Trump signed a minerals deal just last October, ffs.
I don’t think you can find a liberal who thinks the Reagan or Bush presidencies were anything but bad.
“Did we ever think we would see the day when we would say, ‘Please bring back George W. Bush’?” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said during an interview with Evan Smith last week. “We really did work together.”
I’d rather get shot in the arm instead of the head but that doesn’t mean I think getting shot in the arm is good.
I don’t think people get that this difference makes a difference. As a millennial going through college during the GW Bush years, there was at least a Republican party that cared about America, cared about non political government institutions and the service those members participate in, etc. Since the tea party that shit changed. And I don’t think it’s hard to believe Mitt Romney actually cares about this country and means what he says on this thing. I feel disgusted defending Romney, but I kind of miss it when it was guys like Romney were the political opponents in power and not these MAGA folks hellbent on destroying democracy and politicizing the institutions critical to America.
I just found 96 liberals who fit that description.
Saying “hey they might have cared a bit about institutions compared to maga” is not venerating.
venerate /vĕn′ə-rāt″/
To regard with deep respect or reverence. synonym: revere. Similar: revere
Not the same meaning at all. Not even close.
So no you didn’t find 96 people that fit that description.
When you mingle meanings like that, I’m just gonna leave it at that.
“Venerate” may be an exaggeration, but the rest of it, thinking everything was “respectable and dignified” and “completely whitewashing the horrors from their minds” fits that to a T.
You found 96 people who upvoted the comment saying Trump is worse than bush was and that Mitt Romney would be better than Trump is.
There’s nothing there saying Bush or Reagan were good.
a Republican party that cared about America
I feel disgusted defending Romney, but I kind of miss it when it was guys like Romney were the political opponents in power and not these MAGA folks hellbent on destroying democracy and politicizing the institutions critical to America.
Feel disgusted defending is still defending.
By comparison they were great, at least.
No. Many far left groups we’re literally saying the same shit in the comic.
That makes them liberals. My purity test for leftism is whether you’re actually putting in effort to make the world a better place. Millions fail!
It’s amazing how many things are called liberalism, centrism, or leftism on the fediverse. It reminds me of the way socialism and communism are spoke about in far right groups.
Definitions change to meet the needs of their point. Too many people need a better education and a history lesson.
I think they’re thinking “shit I can barely survive and have two jobs and I don’t want my kids to starve and I’m taking care of my elderly parents. I can’t go riot or my whole family will suffer.”
That too. Making things worse doesn’t help the revolution. Making things better helps it. Now that Trump’s in charge, it’s only gotten harder to use direct action and civil disobedience.
There’s also climate accelerationism, which is least logically sound. If humans wipe themselves out, then the problem will be solved.
Potentially at the expense of all non-microbial life.
True, but that is part of the natural order. At the end of the day, humans are just another parasitic and unchecked species that is probably going to learn about their own environmental limits the hard way.
I mean if you hate yourself that much there’s other options than trying to take us out with you
I’m not trying to do anything, but if humans drive themselves to extinction, it is what it is. The planet will go on, new intelligent life will develop eventually, hopefully, if not here than some other planet. But maybe we will come close to the brink of extinction and then finally wake up, perhaps that is what it will take.
The problem is capitalism. Don’t make it about humans as a species when there are countless counter examples we can learn from
The problem is about greed and corruption. Communism doesn’t fix that.
The problem is about greed and corruption.
And a culture that reinforces it.
Communism doesn’t fix that.
If you are talking about Bolshevism, I agree.
The problem is capitalism.
The Soviets were shit on environmentalism for a long time. We didn’t see a serious environmental movement in China until the early 2000s. We’ve never really seen one in the USSR, prior to its collapse.
True. That’s not what I had in mind when I talked about alternatives.
The alternative to Capitalism is not necessarily whatever the fuck the Soviets’ idea of Communism was.
“Capitalism caused all these ecological problems”
“Okay what about the same problems occurring outside of a capitalist framework”
“Those don’t count”
Shrug
You’ve got to move beyond the ideological and address the material. Ecological harm isn’t predicated on privatized profit.
“I’m sick, my covid test is positive. I’m staying at home.”
“Actually, noro virus has similar symptoms. The problem isn’t covid.”
Shrug
It’s not about humans as a species. Capitalism is definitely a driving factor, but this is far from the first time a species has developed maladaptive tendencies that led to ecological destabilization. I am not saying it’s good, but it is not a uniquely human phenomenon by any means.
True, just look at what they are finding out about ancient South American society in the Amazon. Apparently, at one point humans nearly wiped out most of the Amazon rainforest to have gigantic, almost New York sized metropolitan cities.
Even parasites are important to the environment. Also, if you wanna be dragged down to hell, don’t pull us with you.
Not every species is perfectly adapted to the environment forever. Multiple mass extinctions due to ecological destabilization have proven that.
humans are just another parasitic and unchecked species that is probably going to learn about their own environmental limits the hard way.
Humans are the exception precisely because they can see the axe falling and move out of the way.
Outside of the fossil fuel dominated US/Saudi sphere, we’ve seen an enormous collaborated effort to curb greenhouse gases. Not everyone is ignoring the risks and consequences.
What we have the capitalist West is a conscious choice between short term profit and long term survival.
Yes, some have taken steps to move away from fossil fuels, but not all, and most scientists agree it is too late without negative emissions. I agree that it is largely driven by capitalism, and that in and of itself is a root cause of many problems with our species and should be done away with, but if it takes the entire world falling apart to make the realities undeniably apparent, then so be it. I’m not saying I want it to happen, just that that may be the only thing that can make the conditions for real lasting change.
most scientists agree it is too late
I mean, “too late” for what is always the question. Folks keep insisting The Apocalypse is next month. And then it doesn’t come, and we get a wave of “I guess nothing actually ever happens” during a new record heat wave.
if it takes the entire world falling apart to make the realities undeniably apparent, then so be it
The world is a big place. It’s not clear what “falling apart” is even supposed to look like.
I’m seeing people predicting a 4% drop in population because of a particularly harsh El Nino this year. I’ve been hearing about a looming economic crash that’s at least ten years overdue.
At the scope of a human life, all of this is still very gradual change. You’re going to be living in the middle of it and not realize how much has changed because you never knew subzero weather in St. Louis or glaciers in Montana were normal.
The talk is of some kind of sharp sudden drop, and not the further churn of a 30,000 year old global extinction event.
I don’t think that’s on the cards. Non-microbial life has survived 70% of the planet’s forests going up in flames as a consequence of a massive asteroid impact, and the ensuing years or possibly decade+ of planet-wide ash and dust clouds blocking out the sun. And that was just the latest mass extinction event.
You’re giving humanity far too much credit by assuming we’d be capable of anything comparable right now.
I’m fine with the logic of a species going extinct because they destroyed their own ecosystem, but intentionally accelerating that process is what I can only describe as evil. It’s doing massive harm for no benefit. It won’t save the planet’s current inhabitants from further damage; the real motivation is genocide against humans.
There’s pretty much no evidence we will wipe ourselves “out” through climate change.
Really really fuck ourselves over? Sure. But it’s not going to kill literally everyone.
We have to figure out how to live together with the planet one way or another, and one day.
That’s even more of a case for it then. If the truth about climate destabilization is undeniable and happening in front of our eyes, maybe we will finally do something about it. Humans seem to not really give a shit about things until it directly affects their daily lives.
That’s iike living in a house that is falling apart and saying if I just let it fall apart completely then I won’t need to fix the house
That’s a pretty over simplistic analogy. We didn’t build the ecosystem, and we are not going to be rebuilding anything if it collapses. Whatever is left will survive and adapt, and maybe some species smarter than us will evolve in a few hundred million years that will actually learn how to properly live in their environment without destroying it. Or if some humans do survive, they will be able to rebuild society based on an understanding of ecological limits.
There’s also climate accelerationism
Trump has done more to curb emissions with the closing of Hormuz than the last five presidents combined.
Yea, sure, by instigating the bombing of oil fields and refineries, instantly burning hundreds of millions of barrels of oil into the atmosphere. Definitely reducing emissions…
Also, petrochemicals are a requirement for any sort of transition to alternatives. Humanity has been binging for nearly two centuries on free energy through hard oil dependence.
If we don’t tirate off of that the shock will (functionally) kill us. The thought that halting that consumption will solve everything is like an extreme alcoholic thinking quitting cold turkey will work.
