Rule Change for PoliticalMemes
Rule Change for PoliticalMemes
The fundamental tenet of a working democracy is voting. Everyone should have a vote and everyone should exercise their right to vote. To that end we have been seeing posts attempting to shame/mock or otherwise influence people not to vote. While this is a meme community, the idea that people shouldn’t vote goes against the fundamentals of a democracy by the people and for the people. To that end, we are adding a new rule that disallows posts that discourage or shame people from voting. This doesn’t mean that you can’t address how people vote, but even those who don’t agree with you and your political views should still vote. We all should. Everyone. Part of the reason we are in the mess we are in now is because participation in democracy is abysmal. Posts discouraging people from voting are essentially propaganda and will be removed.
PoliticalMemes is a community for having fun at the expense of our political hellscape we find ourselves in. People not voting is a big part of why.
We are taking feedback on this change, please let us know if you agree or disagree in the comments and why.
Centrist Democrats love to interpret any dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party as encouragement to not vote at best and overt support for Trump at worst.
I have every expectation that this will be the standard by which this rule is implemented.
This rule will result in a slippery slope where any post critical of Biden will be be removed, resulting in an echo chamber of like-minded individuals with little engagement and discourse. It has the potential to stifle and eventually kill the community.
Seriously any criticism of Biden and the clowns come out to tell me I should fear Trump is gonna accomplish everything he wants on day one, but Biden can’t do most of what he promised because? You ask for a third party and get accused of dissuading voters from voting. I see Biden “supporters” calling him Hitler lite, and asking well if not Biden then who? Like believing the DNC tale is exactly how these clowns can make someone as unpalatable as Biden seem decent. And the best part is they will always say its no competition and I should be happy for the crumbs of the promises Biden kept because in contrast you better believe Trump is gonna keep all his promises 🙄🤣🤣🤣
Part of the reason we are in the mess we are in now is because participation in democracy is abysmal
No, the reason for the mess is a system deliberately designed to benefit a handful of people at the expense of the rest. Blaming those who don't participate in the system for the system is an absurd little act of mental gymnastics (as well as a service to the aforementioned handful of people, by buying in to the division they sow for the sake of distracting us from them, who are actually responsible).
Should people vote? If they want to. Will it change anything? No. Because the choice is an illusion, as is "democracy".
Perhaps if you actually let people have the conversation instead of shutting it down because confronting the actual depth of the problem makes you too uncomfortable, we might reach a point where we can be rid of this rigged system and build one that is actually "by the people, for the people", because that sure as fuck isn't the case at the moment. Maybe the real issue here is for you to consider with yourself why you're so invested in defending the status quo..
https://libcom.org/article/capitalist-democracy-illusion-choice
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/14/liberalism-and-fascism-partners-in-crime/
E: having seen the example you've given, I'm outa here anyway, new rule or not, would love to know if you mod any other communities so that I can block those too. 👍
The rule isn't in place yet. That's why this post was made to generate feedback, and attempt to engage with the community instead of rule with an iron fist, but you don't seem to understand that.
Bye.
I understand fine, the fact that it is even up for debate is already enough of a problem, which you don't seem to understand.. But hey, way to demonstrate how unbiasedly you're willing to "engage" lol
Oh look at that, they're also the mod of like a third of lemmy.world including news and world news. Such unbias, very discussion.
Oooh!! The same World News that i wasnt banned from for calling out russian propaganda?! No way!
Not voting is a vote of no confidence.
similar deliberative body indicate that they no longer support a leader, government,etc.
Voting is a choice. Not voting is a choice. If you take away the choice of not voting, while only allowing two candidates that a vast majority of Americans don’t want, then can you really call it a democracy?
If voting is important to you, then it would serve the community better if the suggestion of not voting was discussed and denounced in the community itself. That is the purpose of social forums, to discuss ideas.
A forum is a public meeting place for open discussions. This rule is the policing of thought, and the antithesis of a forum.
If voting is important to you, then it would serve the community better if the suggestion of not voting was discussed and denounced in the community itself.
...It would be kind of interesting if the amount of people voting plummeted so much so that it removed almost any sense of considering the results legitimate and representative of the populace whatsoever. So far as I'm aware I don't know of any democracies that have a sort of minimal threshold explicitly set to account for and address such a situation...They all seem to presume sufficient civic participation and confidence in their institutions that their citizens wouldn't simply not participate/vote en masse.
I think part of the reasoning for that being that if things have gotten that bad, surely the citizenry wouldn't simply not vote, they'd actively be overthrowing the institutions they had lost confidence in.
Oh yes, of course! Its why antifazcist groups should welcome fascist speakers to engage in open, honest debate.
That’s a lot of fascists.
It’s certainly easy to support this move when it applies to “discouraging voting”, but it gets murkier for posts about “discouraging voting for a certain candidate”.
The example given was one seemingly implying “X is bad - but you think Y is better??” If the net implication is “don’t vote”, then the concern is valid, but if it’s “Vote for a third party, likelihood be damned”, it does sound more valid. That said, I have yet to see memes positively highlighting a valid third party from front runners.
I’d definitely like a return to elections where we decide which candidate is best, not which is least worse.
Informed voting is what's important. Voting in-and-of-itself doesn't contribute to a healthy democracy. To the contrary, mindless voting almost killed democracy multiple times recently.
To that end, I disagree with the notion that everyone should vote: filling your ballot on name recognition or in accordance with some preacher's orders or some shit is dangerous, and if that's you, then you absolutely should not vote!
Dig. Get at least some basic info on the people on your ballot. Consider the secondary and tertiary effects of any proposed policy; consider how it could back fire, etc. Once you actually understand what you're voting on, THEN vote. But if you won't take the time to do that, just showing up isn't doing any kind of civic duty.
Your right maybe we should have a test that you have to take before you can vote. But that might accidentally disinfancise people who are competent to vote, so to be safe if your family has a tradition of voting you probably learned about it at home, so if your grandfather could vote you don't have to take the test. This is a good and original system you have created.
To vote answer this question.
Snow is the same color as:
- -flower
- -grass
- -skin
- -roses
Aight I thought the other guy was just trolling, so I didn't bother with a reply, but it looks like you reached the same conclusion, so maybe I didn't make myself clear.
No where in my post did I say uninformed voters shouldn't be allowed to vote; I said they shouldn't vote. That might sound pedantic, but it's an important distinction.
My issue is with the cultural notion that "It's your civic duty to vote!" cuz no, it isn't. Voting is a tool, and like any other tool it can be used in a dangerous way if you don't take the time to understand how it works.
If you're not sure how to operate pneumatic hammer, you shouldn't do that either; but I'm not saying you should be disallowed from handling one or face legal consequences for trying; I'm saying YOU should have the sense to recognize the potential for harm from misuse of the tool in question, and YOU should choose to abstain from trying until you've done some homework.
I would assume the poll meant "flour" and choose the first option.
I support the change
Banning memes that "discourage voting" seems open ended enough to easily be "memes that make my preference look bad" are banned.
This doesn’t mean that you can’t address how people vote, but even those who don’t agree with you and your political views should still vote. We all should.
Quoted the relevant section since you missed it.
In favor of this rule
can you give an example of the kind of post you are talking about?
This is an example of one that is getting a lot of reports today. https://alexandrite.app/lemmy.world/post/11948936
i think it's pretty obvious that the post you linked is NOT discouraging voting. it's clowning democrats. but there are comments in that thread that are discouraging people from voting if they are considering someone besides a democrat or a republican, and it is reasonable to curtail that kind of activity.
What is the verdict on this comment from that post?
Super in favor of this one! Barely just got on lemmy and all ive done is engage the bad faith actors in hopes of leaving some trace of sanity for the more impressionable to find.
This very thread is full of, "but cant you see how this rule change could turn authoritarian," and "what u claim to have witnessed isnt real, its all just butthurt democrats and no one is actually actively trying to suppress voting." To the lurkers, take note of the accounts that seem to do nothing but post about why voting is useless, why any complaints about biden are as relevant as complaints about dorito mussolini, or why russian imperial interests arent actually imeperial bc the west only ever lies, a fact unique to the west exclusively.
I fundamentally disagree with the underlying assumptions of this change, but understand its rationale, especially during an election year.
I fundamentally disagree with the underlying assumptions of the “Patriot Act,” but understand its rationale, especially during a War on Terror.
I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. Take any statement, put it in an absurd context, you get an absurd statement. Sure. But why?
"I disagree with capitalism and the elite hoarding all the wealth but I'm not sure I can do much about it alone"
"I disagree with Pineapple pizza and the cooks hoarding all the dough but I'm not sure I can do much about it alone"
Ok.
The difference is that I can share the underlying goal of what the mods are trying to achieve, while I wouldn't share the underlying goal of the war on terror.
But you already guessed that I'm sure. A few edgelord points cheaply scored. That's nice.
Sustained.
voting is not the only way for a democracy to keep its legs. very very far from it, actually. voting barely works and someone organizing on an union is doing far more for democracy than a lifetime blue voter ever will.
getting your opinions challenged is very healthy for public discourse, and this rule is just gonna turn this comm into a US democrat echo chamber.
also there are valid reasons you are even allowed not to vote. theres no reason to vote if you perceive candidates to be all bad (which they usually are), or if you are uninformed/disinformed. it goes on.
just because some people here disagree, doesnt mean that everyone who says this is a paid shill or something.
someone organizing on an union is doing far more.
Because a union - and I'm in one - helps organize ..... you can get there. vvvvvvoooooo... you're almost there.
Worker unions serve the purpose of pressuring employers and/or governments directly for action on issues. Like salaries, leisure time, climate policy, etc. We do it mainly by the implied threat of a strike, mutual aid, and other ways.
Specifically as something beyond just indirectly voting for, say, a presidential candidate expecting him to do everything on our behalf.
Thats because its not meant to just leverage electoral power, but mainly the worker's bargaining power directly: This way our often crappy elected officials on an often rigged system matter way less.