The most accurate thing about this is the liberal allowing the fascist to get on its back in the first place.
Because, you know, it would just be SO RUDE not to.
Or rather, they really hope the scorpion isn’t lying yet again.
Not shown on the shore: hundreds of other frogs watching with full confidence that any scorpion they give a ride across the pond won’t sting THEM.
“lol”, said the Scorpion, “lmao”
Can’t wait to laugh my ass off when washington DC is split into east and west.
North and South? Mason-Dixon line pt. 2?
East and west
“Are you triggered yet, lib?”
dude… I’m the one who can swim for few minutes, you cannot…
“Don’t care, all I care about is triggering the libs. Is that triggering you? HAH! Triggeblub blub blub”
based on a true story
Trump himself used a similar story about a snake in his own speeches. He was telling us who he is.
This is perfect
This applies to maga as well. Trump doesn’t give two shits about them.
Bold characterizing Trumptards as something fierce like a scorpion. I guess they are predators though…
This is what people don’t understand about humans. We want to be on top of somebody else. If everyone was equal then nobody gets to be the best. That fundamentally goes against evolution.
We also aren’t dumb monke. Those are the traits we need to cultivate.
No, that’s not how evolution works. Humans are incredibly complex animals, and there are a ton of different evolutionary traits (some of which seem contradictory) at play that affect our social structures. Boiling it down to “humans want to be on top of someone else” is a huge oversimplification to the point where it’s potentially harmful.
It’s just straight up wrong. One of the reasons humans have done so well is because we’re extremely empathetic and cooperative. Selfish species tend to do poorly, with the majority of species being cooperative, even if not quite as cooperative as us.
Well, in some sense, we DO want to be on top of somebody else. Or under someone.
Procreation is one hell of an evolution booster.
That’s wrong af. Look at the civilizations on top right now. I’ll let you guess which ones are in charge. I’ll even give you a hint they aren’t the peaceful ones.
Depends on your idea of being “on top”. I for one could say Denmark is on top (and has been for some time) as they’ve been some of the happiest people on earth. Does that mean it agrees with your definition?
Wait, the people who raped and pillage? That is not the defense you think it is…
Being dishonest about all these civilizations that abused others is more negative and intellectually dishonest. All I said was that humans naturally try to conquer others once they reach a certain point. If you were correct about your assertions, well we wouldn’t be having a conversation about what if.
I don’t know who’s being dishonest about civilizations doing harm, but it’s certainly not me. I’m advocating for those civilizations to take the blame and responsibility for their actions, not absolving them of culpability in the name of evolution (which is what you’re doing, implicitly).
By blaming things on evolution, you’re taking the responsibility out of the hands of those civilizations doing harm. You’re blaming it on a “natural process”, making it seem like it’s an inevitable part of the human experience, a foregone conclusion. That’s dangerous. Humans are responsible for their actions. Humans can find better ways to do things. Humans have more control over their world than any other animal in the animal kingdom. Humans can even deny evolutionary instincts if the situation calls for it. Humans are more than just products of evolution, and to try and claim otherwise is harmful.
OK, but to say humans AREN’T a part of evolution is being intellectual dishonest at the very least. Not once did I claim that humans are merely a by product of evolution. If you understood my concluding sentence you would see that I make an argument for denying baser instincts. Furthermore you claiming that humans are not connect to these base instincts is causing tremendous harm in that were above nature. Which we are not.
People are shitty by nature and need to grow into conscious being. To try to argue against the betterment of man is asinine. :::.
Mkay cool, I’m not saying any of that. This conversation is over because you can’t stop putting words in my mouth. Goodbye.
Same you just lie about facts to make your point. Idk idc deep thinking isn’t your strongest suit.
I don’t think MAGA believes or cares about evolution. And absolutely no one is going for being “equal”. More equal and less extremes between wealth, yes, but not actual equality. I mean, running as fast as you can doesn’t mean you’re trying or expecting to teleport.
Early 20th century Italian fascists had a popular slogan “Me ne frego”, meaning “I don’t care”.
People don’t really change.
“Me no frogo”
Don’t be the frog.
Portland has taught me to actually be the frog
The original Maga hat!
Hmmmmm
What did Melania have on the back of her jacket that one time
I dOnt ReAlLy CaRe, dO yOu??1
Some say Epstein’s cum
You win, everybody pack up and leave.
Me ne spoogo
And Leftists see the Liberals as the scorpion.
Turns out when people stop benefiting from society, they don’t care what happens to it.
And no, an oppressive police state who kills anyone who gets too poor or upset is not a “benefit” of that society. And when that’s all the system has left, you can’t blame people for not giving a shit.
And Leftists see the Liberals as the scorpion.
I see them as the frog. The stupid fucking frog that knows the scorpion’s nature but gives him a free ride anyway.
What wasn’t seen before this was the scorpion gave the frog a big tax break and insider trading information.
That’s not really a universal truth, Leftists hold a wide range of views on liberalism.
Not on here it doesn’t seem. On here a liberal to them is chuck Schumer or other neoliberals(neo being the keyword here). They think liberalism is about protecting capital. I would argue that socialism can be very liberal if we’re going with the traditional meaning of the word.
But what really bothers me about it is it feels like a wedge issue created to drive the two groups apart, and it seems to work on people that I KNOW are smarter than that. But I guess we liberals thought that about Maga as well
I’d argue you don’t know what Liberalism is.
John Locke was all about private property and individual ownership of the means of production. Liberalism is tied to capitalism from it’s origin.
It’s comparable to AnComs and being in favor of personal liberties, they’re still right wingers at their core.
The warped American notion of liberalism as an analogue for left or progressive is not the norm globally, and certainly not the origin of the word or how we all see it applied in the states.
Liberalism: A Counter History is free on Annie’s Archive, it goes through all the major liberal philosophers and how they defined liberalism when confronted with various contradictions.
It is normally the fascists who claim that everyone they see not as one of them being a lefty, while the subgroups in the group of these "lefties” are more different to each other than they are to some fascist groups
Well, I think, I worded that not so well, but hope you guys still understand.
Tldr:
The “right” wants us to believe, that there is only a single line from right to left through the middle in politics, while in reality it is a multidimensional vector spaceBecause the right’s base doesn’t understand half of the words you used in describing our predicament
The “right” wants us to believe, that there is only a single line from right to left through the middle in politics, while in reality it is a multidimensional vector space
Conway’s Law: The structure of a system reflects the structure of the organization that built it
Have a two-party system, get a two-party model.
More like Democrats see the progressives as the scorpion.
If giving up means you then screw over everyone else that says more about you, than anyone else. It may be reality, but it’s no justification.Yeah, you can try supporting leftists, or you can keep stinging.
Neoliberalism isn’t a popular ideology anymore.
Neoliberalism isn’t a popular ideology anymore.
And yet democrats refuse to abandon it.
Neoliberalism is no where near as popular as it used to be. The neoliberal faction is about as weak as it has ever been since they came to dominate the party back in the 1990’s. It’s not really fair to say Democrats refuse to abandon neoliberalism when there’s plenty of Democrats actively working to move the party away from neoliberalism for decades, and especially now when they are finally at a place where it looks like it could really happen.
It’s not really fair to say Democrats refuse to abandon neoliberalism when there’s plenty of Democrats actively working to move the party away from neoliberalism for decades, and especially now when they are finally at a place where it looks like it could really happen.
I’ve heard this too many times to ever believe mere words from democrats. I’ve seen their actions and those indicate that the party has only changed for the worse.
But the democrats are the ones that have an organization in place in the U.S. that can affect change. Those with more progressive ideals keep stinging them and they sink. As a result we have right wing fascism. Congrats.
What you’re saying only makes sense if you think all leftists refuse to vote, or 100% vote for third parties. This is not even close to reality. Libs love to tell me I’m a Trump supporting liar, but I have voted Democrat my entire adult life, including for Harris and in local piddly elections. Not because I think centrist liberal policies are good but because our broken system forces me to, in the hopes that maybe their platform will grow a spine or a conscious and realize caring for your people is worth more than making a buck.
Other nations with less power and resources than us have figured out how to be progressive, what is our problem? It sure as shit isn’t the people calling for progress.
Its not a matter of 100%. It’s a matter of any. The critical votes have been very close. It’s also if you convince others not to vote or vote 3rd party. So criticizing the democrats has to be done carefully in the right context.
And the trick would be removing money from politics; and removing money controlled bias of mass media.“Oh shit he’s a Harris voter. Okay backup plan, accuse him of undermining voting with no evidence”
Literally every time, man. It’s so predictable.
It’s simple logic. I didn’t accuse you of anything. I just stated my point.
Oh no those mean leftists they hurt the DNC by… not giving them votes they think they were entitled to…
You need to understand that the leftist protest voters did not meaningfully impact the election. That is a fact, and if you want to live in the same reality as the rest of us, you need to internalize that fact. This was DNC propaganda made to make you hate young people and leftist ideology. It’s time to break that conditioning.
If you would like to be upset about the votes Harris was “owed” then be mad at the white and hispanic boomers that stayed home for Harris after coming out to vote for Biden.
It was literally liberal voters that failed the Democratic party. I’m a leftist and I voted for Kamala but all of us leftist combined on lemmy wasn’t going to make a difference
You understand your lack of vote made my death as a trans person orders or magnitude more likely
I voted for Harris you idiot
Let’s all help the fascists and then pretend it’s a moral imperative
Edit: I love the block feature. Tankies can scream into the void all they want.
Let’s all help the fascists and then pretend it’s a moral imperative
That’s centrists’ position on Palestine, yes.
EDIT: democrats and ignoring the left. Name a more perfect tautology.
I always dislike this story because of the biological essentialism it implies and that allows racists and sexists to use it.
Do you also dislike stories with talking animals because animals can’t talk?
It’s a parable, and you seem to be taking it too literally and simultaneously not literally enough.On the one hand, it’s saying not to trust people who want to hurt you even if your interests are aligned. The soviets trusting the Nazis not to attack them just because they both gained by dividing eastern Europe and not fighting a war on multiple fronts. No amount of shared interest will keep a fascist from hating a communist.
On the other hand, you actually really shouldn’t put scorpions on your back. It’s actually fine to reduce the agency of an insect to a stereotype of their biology.
Not sure why you’d getting downvoted here but it’s absolutely been used (a lot) to push racist ideas. I first heard it from an antisemite.
I think it’s just a shit message - “people will betray you on surprising ways, trust no one”
Ofc you misunderstood the message.
Unfortunately, alot of us lived to see that message play out irl. Not in the racist ways obviously, but still
They got upvoted but should have been downvoted because they’re just inventing a weird new sensitivity that you have to strain to even believe can exist in another person’s mind.
Isn’t the message that people will betray you in _un_surprising ways?
I never took it as bleakly as don’t trust anyone.
Frog knows the scorpion is untrustworthy but ignores his intuition and gets burnt for it. I take it as don’t get involved with someone that would drag you down with them.
For anyone trying to prove anything with it, it’s a parable, so it’s advice, not a research paper! 🐸
Speaking of frog parables pretending to be research papers: the whole “a scientist did an experiment and if you boil water slowly enough the frog won’t jump out and just sits there until it dies”. It turns out that’s bullshit. The scientist was trying to figure out brain stuff, so he removed the brains from the frogs and they didn’t jump out when he boiled them. The frogs that still had their brains jumped out of the water around the same temperature as a person would step out of a too-hot shower (25°C).
Scorpions would never sting my back
Said the person who just voted for the “Scorpions stinging backs” party.
I guess it’s both. You wouldn’t expect someone to sabotage themselves
I’ve always preferred the monk and the scorpion one, but I guess it could be used the same way. Never thought about it, honestly.
deleted by creator
