this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
1218 points (98.6% liked)

Microblog Memes

9213 readers
3314 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] zewm@lemmy.world 24 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

What about us folks that don’t care about others and also don’t care about shame?

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 20 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

it’s actually pragmatically cheaper and more efficient to care for others than to treat them like shit.

Pandemic as an example : the more you stay indoors and try to stop the spread of the virus, the faster the pandemic ends and the faster YOU can get back to normal. FORGET that it also stops people dying and protects the vulnerable, it’s in YOUR SELFISH INTEREST.

Or having a basic system of social welfare : giving bread to a poor person costs the price of the bread. Having to imprison them, pay for cops, repair of broken things, investigations etc costs more fucking money. even if you hate people and want them to die, it’s fucking CHEAPER FOR YOU.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

This is insidious Soviet Mathematics.

You provide general goods and services at cost and leverage economies of scale to grow your GDP despite suffering a comparatively small population in a largely pre-industrial country. You exploit camaraderie and inventiveness and curiosity rather than press-ganging serfs or periodically looting colonies full of ambitious, talented, and productive people. You educate the public en mass, instead of just relying on the gentry to pioneer scientific research and development. You build at scale, rather than doing vanity projects restricted to a handful of elites. You pursue projects that appeal to the general public, rather than following the whims of a handful of aristocrats and military commanders.

Only problem is that this can take a generation or more to show real material progress. And even as you're improving your own community, you may have wealthier neighbors who can outrun you, at least in the short term. You might not be welcome into the network of post-colonial trade if you don't have friends in the imperial core. And so you become increasingly self-reliant and nationalistic, which others claim signals your hostility to a global rules based order.

If people in your community can be bribed, coerced, or duped into turning on their neighbors, the network of self-reliance can fail. Your economy can drag. You don't reap all those benefits of scale. You're exposed to the violent intrusion of foreign militaries and the looting of the colonial era. And people lose faith in your system of social welfare, because they fail to see it benefiting them in the modern moment.

The hard math of capitalism is that there's more easy money to be made fucking over ten neighbors than helping one out. And while the long term trajectory of such a society is decay, an insulated tier of individuals can bring in windfalls over the course of their adult lives that make life significantly easier and more luxurious.

For folks in their prime years, there's a real economic incentive to use your superior strength and that of your immediate circle to loot your elders and tyrannize your kids. This feels justified when you were abused as a child. And by the time you're an elder, there's little you can do to protect yourself from the next generation, save to pit them against one another with your accrued savings.

Pragmatically, you need people who understand the bigger picture and have a sense of place within the community over the longer term. For folks who don't see a future among their neighbors, playing nice isn't pragmatic at all. It's a sucker's game.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

ok, then fuck everything, don't even bother having a society.

For folks in their prime years, there’s a real economic incentive to use your superior strength and that of your immediate circle to loot your elders and tyrannize your kids.

great, have them just kill and gang rape everyone they want to, it's cheaper that way.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

don’t even bother having a society

Societies are the mechanism used to pass down historical accounts and ingrain in future generations the value of current cultural practices. The only way you have a functional state is with a current society of people who advocate, educate, and lead us towards its replication and expansion on behalf of future generations.

have them just kill and gang rape everyone they want to, it’s cheaper that way

There's more to life than its spot price at auction.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

Societies are the mechanism used to pass down historical accounts and ingrain in future generations the value of current cultural practices. The only way you have a functional state is with a current society of people who advocate, educate, and lead us towards its replication and expansion on behalf of future generations.

Great job of explaining that with your previous statement. /S

There’s more to life than its spot price at auction.

Not in the society you explained! I'd rather take the pretense away.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ileftreddit@piefed.social 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

1: Those who value human life

2: and those who don’t

It’s kind of the eternal struggle when you think about it

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 15 hours ago

It's :

  1. Those who value human life and
  2. Those who $$value$$ human life
[–] Philote@lemmy.ml 18 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Why are we all looking for witches to burn at the stake in the fields of labor. It’s schadenfreude from the kayfabe theatrics. As long as we poors fight each other, we don’t address the bourgeois. There is no war but the class war. Don’t take the bait. We all know people we care about on the other side of the aisle, stop acting like they are the enemy. They are being tricked as well. The world is being sucked dry by wealthy vempire gammons.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 13 points 22 hours ago

There is no war but the class war.

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I don't care about other people at all. Leave me alone and let me be.

But I also don't believe that anyone should go homeless or hungry when we have billionaires with plenty of money to share, which is why I refuse to vote republican.

Bottom line is that people annoy me, but I still have empathy.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Hello, fellow empathetic misanthrope (or is that "misanthropic empath"?)

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 8 points 21 hours ago

So close

Get rid of billionaires

Without billionaires we're all or the majority of all of us get to compete on a level playing field and have fewer problems. It won't create a utopia because we're just a bunch of messed up monkeys but at least it would be a better situation than what we have now.

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Overlooks the third and largest group: "Leave me alone."

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network -2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

"leave me alone" is often freeloaders. Like, "I want to benefit from society, from roads and the Internet and medical research and fire departments, but I don't want to pay my share". Very few people actually live off the grid

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

The standard that "you must be in total exhile to not be a freeloader" is clearly totalitarian, because A) if we apply the same absolutism to the other categories we get the idea that the first group must all care absolutely and about the exact right "meaningful" things (which is clearly not true), and that the Shameless group must equally be absolute in their evil, and can have no redeeming facts.

And because B) even using the term "freeloader" is totalitarian.

Not only are their people who societies exist in order to support and have "freeload" on them, such as orphans, the disabled, the elderly, babies, children, the poor and incapable, the uneducated and deprived. The huddled masses.

But also because: everyone makes some contribution. It's impossible to exist in society and not. Whether it's artistic, spiritual, intellectual, consumer based, no matter how minor, be it buying shampoo and thus contributing to GDP and taxes, or making someone think via a comment... Or wearing a lovely outfit on the street...

Human existence is a contribution.

So I disagree with your outlook, I think it's totalitarian, anti-humanist, and ugly. I disagree with anyone who uses terms like loser or "freeloader", and I concede that even people I strongly disagree with, are still contributing in their small humanistic and social ways (which all people naturally have).

So I'm not sure you understand the meaning of human society. Why it is, and how it inevitably will continue to be. Where ever we are, it is - "freeloaders" most definitely included.

P.S By the way, most poets, artists, actors, and comedians - cultural workers that is to say - are unemployed bums and "freeloaders". There is no humanity without them. Stop demonizing the poor and people who just want to be left alone.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 3 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

You misunderstood what I meant, so I must have communicated badly.

I meant, people who often say "leave me alone" are "libertarian" types who want to benefit from society without contributing as they're able (with money or labor). Think of the kind of guy who says "leave me alone! I don't want to pay taxes for some school. I don't even have kids." They benefit from public education, but they don't see it that way, and they'd rather keep that 20% of their paycheck than have a fire department. I wouldn't call a baby a "freeloader" because they're not really capable of doing much. It's when people can contribute but selfishly and self-destructively choose not to that I'm scornful.

In other words, when someone says their politics are "leave me alone" I am very suspicious of their understanding of society. They want the privileges of society without the obligations, typically.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 1 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

When I say "leave me alone", I mean:

  • don't come up to my table when I am studying, snatch what I am working on and run away...
  • don't bang/kick on my door when you only intend to run away...
  • don't steal stuff from my bag/locker/whatever container legally marked as mine...
  • don't, when you randomly see me walking on the road, minding my own business, come and beat me up or try to frame me for some random crime that you made up...

... just to then say, "oh! I'm just trying to make friends".

If that is how you (whoever that is) make friends, leave me alone. I don't want to be made into your "friend".

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago

That's fair, sorry I assumed the worst from the language I used. Weathy Libertarian Freeloaders ...i suppose I understand the term being applied to them.

Selfish nihilists is what I call them, values-free economic nihilists.

[–] ThunderQueen@lemmy.world 0 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

There are two types of people in the world. The type of people who try to divide the world into different types of people; and the type of people who don't.

[-Watsky]

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›