We refuse to live under the rule of self-appointed kings.
I.e., kings that we choose are fine.
We believe in fair representation, free speech, and a government that serves the many, not the privileged few.
i.e., representative democracy is an acceptable system of oppression. Government is an acceptable system of oppression
We Stand Against Unchecked Power.
Implying that they don’t stand against “checked” power
For American liberals in general, see the 2024 Democratic Party platforms (PDF). Notice the lack of commitment to abolishing capitalism (even in the long term!). For liberals around the world, see the party platform for each liberal organization. For liberals throughout time, open any important work of classical liberal philosophy, e.g. Locke’s Two Treatises on Government where private property and enclosure is advocated for.
Obviously I’m being a little sloppy in my citations because (1) I just woke up, and (2) is the fact that liberals support certain systems of oppression (e.g. private property, existence of capitalism and the State) supposed to be controversial? It’s really not, even amongst liberals. Like do I really have to cite the facts that objects fall when dropped or that 1+1=2? I can (Newton’s Principia and Russell and Whitehead’s Principia, respectively), but for most purposes these are obvious physical facts. Same with liberals supporting systems of oppression. Because basically every time I tell a liberal “hey you really shouldn’t support these systems of oppression because they conflict with the principles you claim to hold” they basically scream at me like “WELL WE SUPPORT THESE SYSTEMS OF OPPRESSION BECAUSE YOUR IDEAS ARE IMPOSSIBLE AND YOU NEED TO JUST SIT DOWN AND ACCEPT OUR HIERARCHIES AND SHUT UP OR THE SUN WILL EXPLODE AAAAAAA”. Just try it. Make a throwaway account on .world or R*ddit, pick a random liberal and pick the first hierarchy and system of oppression they inevitably defend and start a debate. You’ll see, very quickly and without the decorum they expect from everyone else.
To be clear, I’m absolutely thrilled to see liberals standing up and doing something, even if it’s just a little bit, but that does not mean that they can’t do better. In particular, even if the No Kings movement completely and utterly succeeds at their goals, the system that results would still need to be smashed because it would still be a system of oppression and unjustifiable hierarchy, i.e. the former status quo that destroyed billions of innocent human lives. Honestly…it would be a system still on a course that leads to a Trump-like fascist dictator, because fascism is capitalism in decay.
No offense, but if history started today then yeah you’d be right…but I’ve been paying attention to the No Kings movement since it started. I’m making my judgements based on the totality of the organizers’ actions and words. Sorry I haven’t been keeping a logbook of my every interaction with their rhetoric so you can audit my judgement, so you’ll just have to either trust my judgement or agree to disagree.
The analog to your meme would be:
Me: I think that we should have a choice of pancakes or waffles.
No Kings: We hate pancakes and we hate pancake enjoyers. We will work with the cops and give them your information if you say you like pancakes. (We also gave the waffle lovers’ information to the police.)
… a few weeks later …
No Kings: I like waffles
Me: They hate pancakes
You: *Post meme* See how unreasonable you’re being?
And I absolutely hate this meme because we’re not picking between pancakes and waffles, we’re picking between pancakes and dog shit. The world liberals advocate for is completely dog shit compared to even the most reformist leftist or anarchist. It’s not even close! (Similar remarks apply for what I think was the original context, which was liberals vs. conservatives respectively.)
[Citation provided.]. E.g.:
I.e., kings that we choose are fine.
i.e., representative democracy is an acceptable system of oppression. Government is an acceptable system of oppression
Implying that they don’t stand against “checked” power
For American liberals in general, see the 2024 Democratic Party platforms (PDF). Notice the lack of commitment to abolishing capitalism (even in the long term!). For liberals around the world, see the party platform for each liberal organization. For liberals throughout time, open any important work of classical liberal philosophy, e.g. Locke’s Two Treatises on Government where private property and enclosure is advocated for.
Obviously I’m being a little sloppy in my citations because (1) I just woke up, and (2) is the fact that liberals support certain systems of oppression (e.g. private property, existence of capitalism and the State) supposed to be controversial? It’s really not, even amongst liberals. Like do I really have to cite the facts that objects fall when dropped or that 1+1=2? I can (Newton’s Principia and Russell and Whitehead’s Principia, respectively), but for most purposes these are obvious physical facts. Same with liberals supporting systems of oppression. Because basically every time I tell a liberal “hey you really shouldn’t support these systems of oppression because they conflict with the principles you claim to hold” they basically scream at me like “WELL WE SUPPORT THESE SYSTEMS OF OPPRESSION BECAUSE YOUR IDEAS ARE IMPOSSIBLE AND YOU NEED TO JUST SIT DOWN AND ACCEPT OUR HIERARCHIES AND SHUT UP OR THE SUN WILL EXPLODE AAAAAAA”. Just try it. Make a throwaway account on .world or R*ddit, pick a random liberal and pick the first hierarchy and system of oppression they inevitably defend and start a debate. You’ll see, very quickly and without the decorum they expect from everyone else.
To be clear, I’m absolutely thrilled to see liberals standing up and doing something, even if it’s just a little bit, but that does not mean that they can’t do better. In particular, even if the No Kings movement completely and utterly succeeds at their goals, the system that results would still need to be smashed because it would still be a system of oppression and unjustifiable hierarchy, i.e. the former status quo that destroyed billions of innocent human lives. Honestly…it would be a system still on a course that leads to a Trump-like fascist dictator, because fascism is capitalism in decay.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
No offence, but this reads like
No offense, but if history started today then yeah you’d be right…but I’ve been paying attention to the No Kings movement since it started. I’m making my judgements based on the totality of the organizers’ actions and words. Sorry I haven’t been keeping a logbook of my every interaction with their rhetoric so you can audit my judgement, so you’ll just have to either trust my judgement or agree to disagree.
The analog to your meme would be:
Me: I think that we should have a choice of pancakes or waffles.
No Kings: We hate pancakes and we hate pancake enjoyers. We will work with the cops and give them your information if you say you like pancakes. (We also gave the waffle lovers’ information to the police.)
… a few weeks later …
No Kings: I like waffles
Me: They hate pancakes
You: *Post meme* See how unreasonable you’re being?
And I absolutely hate this meme because we’re not picking between pancakes and waffles, we’re picking between pancakes and dog shit. The world liberals advocate for is completely dog shit compared to even the most reformist leftist or anarchist. It’s not even close! (Similar remarks apply for what I think was the original context, which was liberals vs. conservatives respectively.)