this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2026
1298 points (99.2% liked)
Flippanarchy
2340 readers
967 users here now
Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.
Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.
This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.
Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Rules
-
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
-
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
-
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
-
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
-
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
-
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
-
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'll going to steal food from a homeless person, they are too weak to fight back, ethically I'm fine, it is NEVER unethical to steal food.
There is vast difference between stealing something and robbing somebody.
Indeed, but the absolute statement can be so easily twisted to meet the ends of moment, it really matters little.
Who says that the homeless person isn't off taking a shit, their food unattended, thus back to stealing rather than robbing!
What a shitty way to think.
Maybe.
But using nuance and constructive statements is more difficult than hard line rhetoric. People gravitate to stupid slogans and simple absolute language; it is though killing and destructive to actual conversation.
In the example "it is NEVER unethical to steal food"; this isn't a real position to take; it is grandstanding and shallow; this argument falls at the first hurdle.
Saying something like:
"Theft of food; whilst not necessarily unethical; could be at best morally neutral. The specifics of each situation need be weighed on their merits. Where a person is taking food to feed their family, and the theft doesn't materially affect the owner of the food, such as a large supermarket chain; this act is not unethical."
Is not a pithy and hard hitting as the stupid statement "It is never unethical to steal food. It is unethical to stop someone from stealing food, or report someone for stealing food, or to arrest someone for stealing food."
Whatever you need to tell yourself, buddy.
If you can't seem to understand the words "Always" and "Never", then that is on you.
If this is something that you’re going to pedantically split hairs on, I’ve got news for you sport, you’re a shitty person.