this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
656 points (89.3% liked)

Lefty Memes

4137 readers
395 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, upvoting good contributions and downvoting those of low-quality!

Rules

0. Only post socialist memes

That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)

1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here

Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.

2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such,

as well as condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.

3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.

That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).

4. No Bigotry.

The only dangerous minority is the rich.

5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)

6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.

7. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

(This is not a definitive list, the spirit of the other rules still counts! Eventual duplicates with other rules are for emphasis.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Good thing we (the US) lost the war, or this lady would probably have her own team of lobbyists running their country.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ososalsosal@aussie.zone 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

While I agree in principle I tend to think there are still unforgivable crimes and irredeemable people out there.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 30 points 5 months ago (3 children)

While I agree in principle I tend to think there are still unforgivable crimes and irredeemable people out there.

Then you don't agree.

I wasn't aware crime was about forgiveness.
I thought in-so-far as societies implemented systems of justice, their purpose was restitution and rehabilitiation.

No one gains anything from a person—irrespective their prior actions—being murdered and we all lose a bit of our soul each time a state execution is allowed to take place.

I really expected better from Vietnam, whose "quarantine at gunpoint" public health policies I heartily endorse.

[–] Baku@aussie.zone 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Alright. I DON’T agree.

You should; death as a post-hoc punishment is abhorrent and serves no one.

[–] Baku@aussie.zone 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] ososalsosal@aussie.zone 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

then you don't agree

Allow me some cognitive dissonance because I really don't know what society should do about psychopaths, predators, or cases like those execs who put melamine into milk to spoof the protein metrics, leading to the horrible deaths of a large number of babies.

Holding them indefinitely is a useless drain on the state, killing them leads to the inevitability of innocent people dying.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 3 points 5 months ago

Allow me some cognitive dissonance

Not if you use it to advocate state murder I won't.

killing them leads to the inevitability of innocent people dying.

Innocent people will always have the ability to die, no matter how many people your state murders.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de -5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

If child predators get executed, I don't lose "a bit of my soul", I gain more confidence that the world is now a better place.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 14 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I gain more confidence that the world is now a better place.

Oh word? Did the horrific thing they did no longer happen?

[–] metaldream@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They won’t repeat the horrific thing they did while dead, that’s for sure.

I’m against the death penalty but it’s not hard to see why some people support it.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 1 points 5 months ago

I’m against the death penalty but

Shut the fuck up. If there's a "but" ever then no the fuck you are not.

They won’t repeat the horrific thing they did while dead

Did the original horrific thing not happen? Does murder ameliorate past suffering in any way?

Vengeance is not justice, it is sick.

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works -2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Child predators have recidivism rates of 10-35% depending on which studies you're reading. Each one of those assaults is a potentially life-altering trauma induced in a child. Exactly how many should someone be able to do before we consider they're not going to be rehabilitated?

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

A life in prison and state sanctioned execution are different, though.

It's also worth considering why these criminals are criminals. If they were, say, violently abused as a child themselves...does that matter? Functionally, it doesn't matter to the victim


I get that. But should the state be in the business of executing such people?

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

But should the state be in the business of executing such people?

Honestly I've always felt this was the strongest argument against a death penalty. That said the argument carries nearly the same weight for life imprisonment, and still some for the act of imprisonment at all. We continue to trust juries of fools to judge people to this day, but that is still unfortunately more palatable than giving the right to someone to unilaterally choose your jury.

I'm onboard with a culture of reform and education for convicts because it works, but I also recognize some people cannot be reformed and keeping them imprisoned is needlessly dangerous for many parties. There needs to be a line where we accept someone is too far gone.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Each one of those assaults is a potentially life-altering trauma induced in a child.

Don't tell me what being abused as a child does to someone, thanks.

Does killing the person who did it make the assault not have happened?

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's not just about the assault that happened, it's also about the risk of considerable harm in the future. Killing someone for one act of sexual predation is going to be considered extreme by many but not all people. But what happens after the second or third times? How many is too many?

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 0 points 5 months ago

How many is too many?

A single state murder is too many. Full stop.

Add into that how you've just given child abusers incentive to murder their victims and scared children out of informing on a family member for which the death of whom they do not wish to be responsible.

But what kind of fucked up society can only stop anti-social behavior through murdering its perpetrators?

[–] metaldream@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago

Of course it doesn’t, that’s such a condescending question.

The obvious response is that the perpetrator has a 0% chance of reoffending if they’re executed and that does carry weight with a lot of people.

[–] Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Is that equivalent to 65% don't reoffend? Or am I misunderstanding the recidivism rate?

[–] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, which is why my question isn't just rhetorical. How many is too many? You could make a case for 1 (if you believe the crime is too heinous), or 2 (if you believe in second chances), or 3+ even. But where do you draw the line and accept someone isn't going to stop?

[–] Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 5 months ago

OK, so ignoring that not going to change doesn't mean the death penalty is valid (the very idea presupposes the existence of states and the idea that a power structure can put people to death), that using the upper limits of your statistics means that for every 1 (0.35) who would reoffend that is murdered, you've also murdered 2 (0.65) who would not.
So if you do want to go ahead on your executions, the number of reoffenses should be up at 3 or so as a minimum.

But there are better ways to deal with it, as executing people is bad for the people who have to do it, the families of the executed, and sometimes even the victims and families as they're robbed of a chance for closure and understanding.

[–] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago

And if an innocent person gets executed for the crime?

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 9 points 5 months ago

And do you think these child predators had charming upbringings? Or perhaps they were filled with horrors and trauma?

Yeah, there are absolutely evil people out there, and if you think the state should execute them, that's your opinion. But to think that all heinous crimes come from a vacuum is naive.

[–] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Huh. At least where I am from "Death penalty for child predators" is a common far-right talking point.

[–] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 months ago

You've exposed me! I don't sympathize with child predators, so I must be a Nazi!