this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2025
881 points (100.0% liked)

Political Memes

8754 readers
2675 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 72 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I always say neoliberals will affirm your identity and support your right to be who you are!... As you die in the gutter of exposure and capital defense force brutality. Sorry, free market forces! 🤷

You can't eat pride ribbons. You can't live in pride ribbons. A neoliberal is better than a scapegoating fascist, but so is an empty soda can. Neoliberals are also equally as effective as an empty soda can in opposing fascism, the inevitable outcome of capitalism when left to run amok instead of straightjacketed to serve society as it must be.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Look, what matters here is that everyone is included equally under oppressive capitalist movements which aim to drain of us of our lifeblood and monetize our very cells.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Neoliberal doesn't actually mean " The newest Brand of liberal" NeoLibralist regimes historically have also been exceedingly anti-queer. The term was coined in the 80's to describe a burgeoning different brand of liberal government that focused on cutting spending by privatizing swaths of the government. Think Thatcher, Regan and the modern Republican party... See also the early Nazis who historically privatized huge amounts of government to pad the wallets of their supporters but the label was applied retroactively.

If they are getting rid of government services and outsourcing them to a private company that's "Neoliberal politics". You are right that they are effective as an empty soda can at stopping facism but that's because they are usually better positioned to assume power, give up on democracy and go fascist but they aren't the group you're calling out here.

Really the bar for what "liberal" means is a system with a basic set of rights of the person that cannot be infringed upon by the government, universal rights of the person to own stuff (though not all stuff) and a dedication to some kind of democratic system. Basically it's become democracy's basic format and practically everyone in government who isn't a fascist is some variation of liberal or at least playing by Libralism's rules. It's not a statement on socially progressive or socially conservative rhetoric. You're probably better off specifying " Social Progressives" if you want to be accurate to whom you're talking about.

It's kind of the same rules as "NeoClassisism" which isn't constantly updated to mean the newest thing. That term got coined to specifically refer to an art style that is now 300 years old. Neo these days practically never refers to anything cutting edge.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

No they're just using the Tankie definition of (neo)liberal: "my enemy". It's part of the theory of social fascism, which claims that everyone who disagrees with me is a fascist.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

so... why didn't the left stop fascism? I hear a lot of talk about killing people, but it's been three months and nothing has happened.

Are we all just yappers?

You can bitch all you want, but the right won, and they won exactly what they wanted. So bitching about it on the left isn't going to make us anymore likely to win, is it?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We have no leftwing party in the United States

I phone banked for Sanders on 2 campaigns.

I don't see Neoliberals or Fascists as winning, just different degrees of losing.

I no longer have the slightest hope of ever "winning" a prosocial government here. We're too oligarch captured.

I talk and comment to maintain my sanity in an insane capitalist hellscape I lack the power to change.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (4 children)

We have no leftwing party in the United States

probably because the left is so dysfunctional they cant form a cohesive group that people want to vote for.

I no longer have the slightest hope of ever “winning” a prosocial government here. We’re too oligarch captured.

perhaps join the liberal fight, and fight against things like oligarchy, which liberals are not for, because it's obviously bad for institutions. The better the institution is at helping the people, the better the people are.

I talk and comment to maintain my sanity in an insane capitalist hellscape I lack the power to change.

Liberalism is basically the only option you have here, realistically. Anything you can do to change the political tide and get people to care about the importance of good governance, is a good thing.

You could plot a coup and overthrow the government, but we're not delusional, and that's obviously not happening anytime soon so, might as well explore other routes.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Liberals are for oligarchy. How can you be anti-oligarchy if you are pro-capitalism and pro-markets?

Weird how the left is crushed and weak when the entirety of the US 20th and 21st century is crushing anti-oligarchy (a.k.a left) forces. Maybe it isn't a failure of the goal, but that willing yourself into power isn't going to magically make it happen.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Liberalism is not inconsistent with regulation. Oligarchy introduces inefficiencies to the market. Liberal Democrats have been generally open to and supportive of regulations which oppose oligarchic monopolies, and mitigate externalities. They certainly have their flaws, too many to enumerate here, but they generally want the market to run as "purely" as possible, without the confounding effects of oligarchy. Oligarchy and monopolies upset the mechanisms of the market, and the liberals are the ones passing regulations to try to prevent that. This much is obvious by the existence of regulations, and the near absence of legislators to the left of liberals.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Liberalism is not fully mutually exclusive with regulation, but liberal regulation is to try to maintain capitalist markets against their own failures. Yes, they can be willing to engage in some regulation to try to maximize future markets and capitalism. But they are pro-oligarch and pro-inequality, liberals are trying to maintain it long-term even if the most extreme excesses of oligarchs must be reigned in for the short term.

But most importantly, Oligarchy and monopolies aren't an "upset" or disruption of markets, but the obvious and natural outcome. Profits are optimized by consolidation and removing competition. And even if competition is maintained, once one company wins the competition there is monopoly, and the fact that most capital intensive industries have a natural barrier to entry (it would take billions of dollars of venture capital to enter and be a very weak competitor with the incumbent) means that markets have oligarchy and monopoly as their natural and necessary outcome.

A homeless guy can't just immediately become a billionaire by saying that there should be a competitor of genetic testing with 23andMe.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 51 points 2 months ago (12 children)

Can someone who identifies as a leftist explain to me what "neoliberal" means? I have no fucking clue at this point.

[–] [email protected] 82 points 2 months ago (5 children)

'Free market,' market-oriented reform capitalism; think Reagan, Bill Clinton, any moderate or conservative before the trump era.

It has been the sole economic theory in power in the US since the 1970s, with more or less a sliding scale between more neoliberal (republicans before 2016) and less neoliberal/more classical liberal (Biden's and Harris's campaign messaging, not Biden's actual actions).

The reason it sounds confusing, especially in memes, is because you think dems and republicans have different economic theories behind their actions, when in actual legislative reality they're just more or less neoliberal, and the minute differences get overblown in campaign rhetoric.

[–] [email protected] 60 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

The reason it sounds confusing, especially in memes, is because you think dems and republicans have different economic theories behind their actions, when in actual legislative reality they're just more or less neoliberal, and the minute differences get overblown in campaign rhetoric.

The funny thing is that it's Trump, of all people, who represents the first genuine shift away from neoliberalism for the US in 50+ years. That fucker is downright mercantilist.

Too bad it's a shift away from neoliberalism in the opposite of the direction the leftists wanted to go.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That fucker is downright mercantilist.

Also a fake populist. He says things that seem like he will work to benefit the working class, but completely lies to them and screws them over at every opportunity.

The imminent $6T tax cut for the rich and corporations will be Trump’s magnum opus.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago

fake populist

AKA "demagogue." That's the essential difference between Trump and a populist like Bernie Sanders: Trump is a demagogue; Sanders isn't.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

It has been the sole economic theory in power in the US since the 1970s

I'm not American so I may be missing some nuance, but I find it hard to say that, for example, Carter and Reagan shared the same economic policy, or Obama and Trump. Only by flattening away any nuance whatsoever would those be called identical.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 months ago (1 children)

First of all, Trump really is very different. All these tariffs are decidedly not neoliberal.

Trump aside, though, Carter, Reagan and Obama really did share broadly similar policy with regards to free trade treaties and whatnot. The Democrats were better on support for unions, but not so much better that they weren't willing to throw them under the bus of cheap foreign labor.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

White Karens who drive around with awareness ribbons on their prius and chastise you for calling black people black instead of "African American" and really think that someone needs to do something about the current social crisis as long as it doesn't upset anyone or anything and as long as everything stays exactly the same, and as long as nobody messes with their investments. They secretly cannot stand people different than themselves and want to retire on a golf course.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

basically the meme among the left is that everybody who "dragged their feet" is a "liberal" or "neoliberal"

the left tends to have a problem where they leech off of existing parties and groups, but then immediately throw them under the bus when convenient for their party. This is just an extension of that.

The modern vernacular for liberal is, weird... To say the least, but in short, basically the average democrat is "a liberal" the average voting democrat specifically.

Historically, a liberal is someone who believes in government, and the institutions it provides, the fact that you should respect it, lest you ruin it. And the fact that you can achieve the best outcomes, for all people when everybody is represented. Liberals traditionally don't have an issue with competing, or opposing viewpoints, they have issues with people who don't respect institutions, or don't want them to exist at all. A "Liberal democrat" may be fine with the republican voter, but have a problem with the way the republican base is campaigning, and running the country. Or even specific demographics of the republican voter, like MAGA for example.

Joe Biden is a good example of this, and if you look at his term, he was very, and i mean very successful, had some of the most effective legislative work in a long time. Was popular across the aisle to a significant degree (not MAGA obviously) and respected those that were.

The problem with the modern day left, is that they have outgroup problem. They want everybody who isn't "left" and exactly in sync with their ideology to get fucked, basically. This extends further, since the left doesn't respect the government, or it's institutions, but i've yet to see any good whitepapers talking about a more effective form of government, it's all just performative yapping about why "government bad and leftism good"

I'm not going to dive into the specifics of leftism here, because frankly, not relevant, it's pretty similar to liberalism, minus the government stuff, and some slight differences, but the modern left doesn't in any way shape or form adhere to that.

And before anybody yaps at me, calls me a slur or whatever, i just want to say, i'm not doing a both sides meme, i think the republican party is far, far worse. I think the democratic party is far more suited to running the country effectively, as evidenced by historical terms in office (the left would VEHEMENTLY disagree with me on this one, but the facts back me up here) The problem i think is specifically with the far left, the online far left in particular.

as you may have gleaned, i would consider myself a liberal, specifically a "governmental classical western liberal" if you want to get into the weeds of it, i think the lack of respect for government institution, and the role it plays in society has ruined our country. And there is simply no way back into a respectable position, without reinstating that within the public, i don't care how it's done, it needs to happen. I'm very sure most scholars on this topic would agree with me when i say that this is the most important thing to fix right now.

As a liberal should, i'm not picky about political views or ideology, as long as you respect the one thing keeping this country from grinding to a complete halt and being nothing more than a thought in the wind 20 years down the line. Unfortunately i don't think the right even posses enough brain power or will to comprehend this, and i don't think the far left is physically capable of comprehending this fact fully. (they are more than willing to mentally comprehend it, but they get mad the second anybody crosses them, and calls them wrong, so they never actually give it any serious thought)

Anyway, inb4 people yell at me all angry like.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Perfectly said. Thank you! This needs to be required reading on the subject.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

It mostly means a dedication to deregulation and free markets. More specifically, private-public partnerships. That is the difference between them and Libertarians or Anarcho-Capitalists, since Neoliberals see that the government needs to provide things like courts, military, police, etc. but want to insert private companies to provide government services (e.g. in WW2, soldiers cleaned and laundered the military's uniforms internally, now a private company will do the laundry for a military base at a 50% markup).

As all political ideology, in its original formulation, Neoliberalism was a deviation from liberalism, in the Vienna Circle, by its rejection of "political liberalism". It didn't believe in formal freedom, democracy, equality, etc. Real freedom is the freedom to buy and sell on an unregulated market, real democracy is the ability to vote with your wallet, and real equality is the lack of regulations protecting one group from another. This is why neoliberals of the 1920s and 30s were pro-fascist, since the fascists were so dedicated to privatization and repressing socialists and communists. Thus preserving the freedom of the market, even if later neoliberals want to walk that back.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

https://youtu.be/5luQB_yFmTM

https://youtu.be/Vjt51bMHnXA

https://youtu.be/_xAqZJTIsIA

https://youtu.be/vyl2DeKT-Vs

Tldw; liberals still want capitalism and the class hierarchy it creates. They just want capitalism that is supportive of gay and black people and social safety nets.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Lmao @ the idea of neolibs supporting socials sfety nets.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 months ago

The middle panel is entirely superfluous. Take that out and you have an accurate representation of both the GOP and DNC.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Neolibs: Half of those people should be women #blm #acab #pride

Ftfy

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

Needs some awareness ribbons too.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I do wonder what the makeup of 100 people would have to look like to be perfectly (or as perfect as possible) representative of all demographics, every way we chop them up. Race, nationality, gender identity, sexuality, permanent disfigurement, financial class, whatever.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

There's more than 100 possible combinations of race, nationality, gender identity, sexuality disability, etc, so you couldn't accurately represent the whole human population with 100 people.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I don't believe for a minute neoliberals would hold to that half women thing.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah you’ll get one board member, maybe, if they feel like it. The steps needed even just to reform capitalism to eliminate gender inequality are considered way too radical by neoliberals.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

They sure love to pitch men against women and vice versa deliberately to silence worker rights movements and they're doing it in more ways than most people are willing to admit. Ask them to close the gender pay gap and a neoliberal will tell you about their women quota and how they placed a woman in a "leading" position (she has no power and didn't get a raise) and how progressive they are already. Ask them for a raise and a neoliberal will tell you how women have it worse than you. You're right in a way of course. It's a convenient diversion for them and nothing more.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

I'm convinced that 95% of people that use the word neoliberal don't know what it means.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The author of this stupidity certainly didn't.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I feel that way about people using liberal as well.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"I'm a centrist"

Actually republican but doesn't want to admit it

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago

HIRE 👏 MORE 👏 WOMEN 👏 GUARDS 👏

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Smells like Tankie in here.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Finally a meme distinguishing libs and neoliberals

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Well it doesn’t show the libs at all, but liberalism and neoliberalism are basically the same thing. Libs think a free market is all that’s needed, NeoLibs think a market needs state intervention.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (3 children)

all i'm gonna say, is that i don't see leftists proposing an actual function government model that would fix all of our problems and make society better.

I do see a lot talking about how shit america is though. So there's that i guess.

For as much as you want to hate liberals and liberalism (and there are problems), it's hard to do anything with a dysfunctional government, and classical western liberalism provides a great solution to that problem. The other options aren't exactly better.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Redistribution of wealth. Housing as a human right. Workplace democracy. Minimum wage indexed to cost of living.there are lots of socialist platforms that go unadopted.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

Dios mio! (Draws a cross.) A LIBERAL!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (3 children)

So weird how in all these memes, the leftists are always the hero, yet when the time comes to make the bare minimum of effort to stop a fascist from taking over America-

They are nowhere to be seen.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

So weird how, every time there’s criticism of the Democratic Party, some pearl clutcher brings out a cynical argument to divert attention from the train wreck that they persist in simping for.

I’m super tired of the Schrödinger’s Leftist argument - somehow insignificant enough to ignore on policy proposals, yet simultaneously crucial enough to be bullied into electoral compliance.

If a meme is giving you badfeels because your party keeps taking a rough shit each election whilst choking out grassroots challengers, maybe you should demand a better party instead of posting drive-by takes online?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Wait, when was there anti-fascist options for control of America? Was one of the two major parties anti-genocide, or opposed to putting minorities in concentration camps without due process? I think that you just want lower tariffs, so that your Nintendo is cheaper.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Americans and tankies who don't have a clue...

load more comments
view more: next ›