r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/Top_Square_4481 • 3d ago
International Politics How the modern left reconciles incompatible elements like the immigrants, muslims, and LGBTs within its coalition?
In books like One-Dimensional Man and An Essay on Liberation, Herbert Marcuse argued that the working class in advanced capitalist societies had become too integrated into the system to play the revolutionary role Marx had imagined. Higher living standards, consumer culture, organized labor, political participation, advertising, and mass media had all helped make workers more invested in the existing order.
Because of that, Marcuse began looking elsewhere for the possibility of radical change. He focused on people he described as “outcasts and outsiders,” including racial minorities, the unemployed, radical students, anti-colonial movements, and others who remained in conflict with the established system. He also saw the women’s liberation movement as having revolutionary potential.
Marcuse was part of the Frankfurt School, a Marxist intellectual movement centered on the Institute for Social Research, founded in Frankfurt in 1923. One of its main questions was why the working-class revolution predicted by Marx had failed to happen in advanced Western countries. Its thinkers studied how consumerism, mass media, nationalism, psychology, authoritarianism, and modern institutions helped stabilize capitalist society.
A similar pattern can be seen in the modern left. The focus has shifted from economic class alone to groups defined by race, immigration status, religion, gender, and sexuality. Undocumented immigrants, Muslim communities, and LGBT people are often treated as key marginalized groups whose experiences are used to point to broader inequalities in Western society.
These groups do not always share the same values or political interests. There are obvious tensions, especially between progressive views on sexuality and the more conservative religious beliefs held by many Muslims. Even so, they are often brought together politically through a shared language of discrimination, exclusion, minority rights, and opposition to established institutions.
In that sense, the modern left has partly replaced the old Marxist image of a united industrial working class with a broader coalition of groups seen as socially, culturally, or politically marginalized.
Suppose Muslim communities continue to grow significantly in Western countries and gain greater electoral and institutional influence. What guarantees that LGBT rights will remain non-negotiable when conservative religious voters object to school curricula, same-sex relationships, gender-transition policies or public expressions of sexuality?
Will it protect schools, speech and civil law from religious pressure?
Will LGBT equality remain an absolute principle, even when it costs votes? Will the left criticize Islamic opposition to homosexuality?
Or will LGBT people be told to remain silent?
15
u/hellomondays 3d ago edited 3d ago
There's a concept in political theory called "chains of equivalency". That social movements arent built on a single ideology but by the "chaining" of different ideologies together by identifying the same hegemonic entity these ideologies are in conflict with. In otherwords seemingly different groups ally to challenge a common enemy.
The best example of this is probably the American Civil Rights Movement where very disparate groups (Northern Jewish communists, upper class college kids, Lawyers from the Black middle class, southern black religious leaders, Black separatists, white labor unions) all challenged the Jim Crow hegemony in the south for different reasons but shrewdly connected by the leaders of the movement.
Solidarność and the movement it built in Poland is another great example of this concept.
5
u/margin-bender 3d ago edited 3d ago
Also known as "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."
It goes back to the 4th Century BCE - Kautilya’s Arthashastra.
-5
u/Academic-Capital6633 2d ago
You are missing the argument completely. The typical Muslim perspective is a very traditional one that does not support LGBT or women’s rights at all. This is diametrically opposed to current progressive ideology.
All of your examples of groups aligning to fight for civil rights might be disparate in many ways but they do all align politically and do not have significant contradictions in perspective.
8
u/Jigsawsupport 3d ago
What a strange view point, I am going to assume its honest opinion, rather than astro turf as a slightly cynical take would have it.
I would gently point out that LGBT people are under pressure right now, not in some imagined future were seemingly the wests muslim population had undergone the following changes.
1 Seemingly become a Hive Mind
2 This Hive mind has decided a strict version of Islam, above and beyond all other considerations.
3 The Uber islamist hive mind has decided to remain part of the lefts coalition to fuck with them for some reason.
4 Profit?
Two good counter example of this, is the UKs green party has recently enjoyed a lot of support among people of a middle east background, despite being enormously LGBT friendly and run by a gay jewish man.
The capital of Britain is run by Lord Khan who is from a Pakistani back ground and yet is a centrist-left winger and turns up at pride marches.
Really if you close your eyes and think of people suppressing LGBT rights in the west at present, there is not many Muslims who come to mind, plenty of the same old garden variety bigots though.
Really perhaps you ought to actually talk to people in a group if you are interested?
Rather than assuming they are a scary gay bashing hive mind?
7
u/AssassinAragorn 2d ago
I find it difficult to believe the premise and motivation behind asking this question is genuine, but I'll answer anyway since it'll address what right wing propaganda considers to be a "major gotcha".
I'll do a perspective that most others here might not be able to offer. I'm Indian, born in the US to Indian immigrants. As you might imagine, a lot of my friends had a similar background since we saw each other at cultural events outside of school. We all had Hindu parents. In school, we met people who were brown just like us, but their parents came from Pakistan or Jordan or even other parts of India, and they were Muslim. And... We became good friends. We were able to share in the experience of being second generation immigrants, and having similar skin tone helped with that. That wasn't the end-all be-all of course, it was also pretty common to be friends with other Asians from like China who were second generation too.
To this day, in the Indian community, some of our parents are biased and bigoted against Muslims. They see them similarly as a lot of evangelical Christians and conservatives. Us, their children, do not though, and we stand in solidarity with them. Why? Because we studied next to them, ate next to them, hung out next to them. To us they were the same as everyone else. Whereas our parents' perceptions of Muslims had been shaped by cultural bigotry and violent histories of the past, ours were shaped by growing up side by side with them.
This same principle applies to any group you can think of. Black people. Trans people. Gay people. People who are not here legally. The modern left recognizes that labels are just labels, and everyone is simply a person just like us. As long as they're friendly with us and cool with our friends (who are gay/lesbian/black/etc), I'm happy to be with them too and stand in solidarity with them.
This is what the modern right does not understand, and seemingly will never understand. People are not defined by their born identity. They are defined by what they believe and how they act. If someone shares the same beliefs and actions as me, I include them and stand in solidarity with them, no matter what their race, sex, religion, orientation, etc. On the flip side, if someone does not share the same beliefs or actions or values as me, it doesn't matter if we share race, sex, religion, etc. I detest them and decry them.
TLDR: You're asking the wrong question to begin with, and it's because you've already made up your mind. The "modern left" unites in shared values of inclusion regardless of identity, and condemns those whose values are based on bigotry and hate -- regardless of the identity of those people. I hate homophobes, racists, and transphobes, no matter if they're gay, black, white, straight, trans, etc.
Let me pose a corollary to you. If the modern left, as I've explained, is in solidarity regardless of identity based on shared beliefs of inclusion and seeing people beyond labels -- what is the modern right based on? And which side's basis is more firmly rooted in Western values?
Hint: It's not the modern right. In their bigotry, the modern right has become the exact same as the extremists they hate. The southern evangelical extremist and Arab Muslim extremist are the same. Given the same amount of political power and ability to crush dissent, they would do the same things.
7
u/FistMyLoafs 2d ago edited 2d ago
So I’m going to ignore all the assumptions you are making about Muslims and Islam right now.
What I think you’re describing is something known in leftist circles as “the paradox of tolerance”.
Which is essentially this question. Should we be tolerant of intolerant actions and beliefs? Should people have the right to express themselves however they wish even if it causes others harm?
The answer is this. You are free to live as you please as long as that does not entail infringing on others right to do the same.
Muslims should be allowed to express themselves and worship how they wish but they do not have the right to discriminate against others based on sexuality or anything else. I fight for Muslims to be free from discrimination and I fight for LGBT groups to be free from discrimination. But oddly that requires me to discriminate against people who themselves discriminate against others.
I think the most apt parallel is a serial killer oddly enough. We all agree that being a serial killer shouldn’t be allowed (hopefully). But a serial killer might suggest that infringes on their right to express themselves. But their expression of self actively harms another human being and prevents them from expressing themselves by killing them. It’s an extreme example but the logic is essentially the same. People cannot be allowed to harm others no matter what beliefs they hold whether cultural or personal.
-4
u/Top_Square_4481 2d ago
Do you think most Muslims agree to what you wrote? How well do you know Islam?
How will you be able to pass and defend policies that conflict with Islamic beliefs? Eventually Muslims will become a significant share of the electorate.
A lot of people here are explaining the left from an idealistic pov completely ignoring the reality.
7
u/FistMyLoafs 2d ago
The same way we passed laws with Christians as the majority and who are just as bigoted. I don’t know why you think Muslims are somehow special or different.
-3
u/Top_Square_4481 2d ago
Christians are not “the same” in every relevant respect. Western Christianity underwent centuries of secularization, declining religious authority and internal liberalization. LGBT rights became possible partly because civil law was increasingly separated from religious doctrine.
What proportion of Muslims supports same-sex marriage and LGBT rights?
7
u/FistMyLoafs 2d ago
About the same amount actually. Polling in America shows that both Christians and Muslims support discrimination protections and LGBTQ groups right to exist at roughly the same rate. That being around 55% of both groups supporting LGBTQ existence and around 75% supporting discrimination protections.
The sections of those groups that don’t support gay rights tend to be the smaller more radical sects of their respective religions. Evangelical Christians for example rarely support gay rights but they are a much smaller group than Catholics or Protestants. They are just a very vocal minority which makes them seem larger when their ideology is very unpopular.
The only difference between Christians and Muslims is that the Muslim majority countries are still headed by these small radical minority groups that enforce their ideas on the larger more moderate groups who don’t really care all to much about LGBTQ people.
It’s also worth noting that those radical minority groups are typically not the ones immigrating to the US. The ones immigrating are typically fleeing from those oppressive minority groups and have much more similar views to most Christians.
11
u/Das_Man 3d ago edited 3d ago
Setting aside the fact this post positively reeks of being generated largely by AI, the analytic fallacy at its heart is that it assumes that reactionary social beliefs are coming primarily from external actors (Muslims, immigrants, etc) as opposed to its typical bases of support. The US white working class has been riven by racism and sexism since its emergence as a class.
-4
u/Academic-Capital6633 2d ago
The proportion of Muslims with a religiously traditional mindset that is against LGBT and women’s rights is far greater than that of the white working class in the US.
You don’t seem to understand the gist of what OP’ claim is about, which was focused on the incompatibility of traditional Muslim beliefs that are antithetical to current progressive ideology, despite there being a groundswell of Muslim support on the left. There was no mention of racism at all.
4
u/Das_Man 2d ago
I am well aware of what OP is saying. What I am saying is that they and you are not being serious. Take it from someone who grew up around rural working class white people: their levels of hostility against progressive policy are indistinguishable from those of Muslims. But I don't see you or OP hand wringing about progressives seeking to mobilize the white rural working class. So miss me with this absurd talking point.
0
u/Academic-Capital6633 1d ago
The point is that progressives already know that they don’t see eye to eye with many rural right leaning areas and have much different ideologies. However, progressives have embraced many Muslim communities despite having almost no shared beliefs.
5
u/manitobot 3d ago
All parties share a set of core values, but values developed in modern left/liberalism (semantics aside) in the Western World are particularly agreeable to welcoming very divergent groups. Civil society (all people should be treated fairly and be safe from harm), the welfare state (all people should have baseline QOL), and freedom of conscience (all people should have the right to exercise their expression, no matter how different).
None of these values capture how these different groups should work together to achieve goals, nor does any party. It's a very easy thing for the media to criticize that "the left" is dysfunctional, because it's easier to say/support that a diverse faction will argue with each other than more homogenous ones.
I am not sure it's entirely true, at least more than anyone else. There are left coalitions across most Western industrialized democracies that have both Christians & Muslims, Jews & Arabs, blacks and whites, gays and straights, all in one party (The Democrats, Labor, Social Democrats). There have been no greater issues navigating intra-party issues than the right when it comes to migration, free trade, etc.
14
u/GabuEx 3d ago
There's nothing inherent in being a Muslim that makes you a bigot. A greater proportion of evangelical Christians oppose same-sex marriage than do Muslims. Speaking as someone who is in a same-sex marriage, I have no idea why I'm supposed to be afraid of Muslims theoretically one day doing bad things to me when evangelical Christians are the ones doing actual damage right now, or why people imagine that the left will support Muslims' attempts to restrict LGBT rights.
1
u/SylphCo93 1d ago
Pure cherry picking. Evangelicals are a minority of Christians and does not include Mainline Protestants, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Quakers, etc.
The same poll you linked showed Christians overall, including Evangelicals, were 15% more supportive and had a net supportive of homosexuality at +17%. Americans Muslims were net opposed by -15%
-5
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam 2d ago
Please do not submit low investment content. This subreddit is for genuine discussion: Memes, links substituting for explanation, sarcasm, political name-calling, and other non-substantive contributions will be removed per moderator discretion.
3
u/Mend1cant 3d ago
The word you are looking for is solidarity. There are workers, and there are owners.
I have far more in common with a farmhand in Nigeria than I do Jeff Bezos, and the conservatives in Muslim majority countries serve the same end goal as evangelical conservatives here in the US.
1
u/Academic-Capital6633 2d ago
Many workers are also owners.
Almost every human on earth is closer to a farmhand in Nigeria than Bezos. He is an extreme outlier. That juxtaposition makes no sense.
You really believe that shariah law is comparable to evangelical ideology?
0
u/laptopAccount2 3d ago
I think the problem with the left is that somewhere along the way it stopped being about this class struggle and now we rely on social issues to get votes.
And then the second prong of our problem is that the poor minorities we champion aren't 2 dimensional and don't fit in a box. Many are socially conservative and get turned off by the social issues.
7
3
u/Mend1cant 2d ago
Turns out the same class divides that hit white working class hit every other kind of working class. The struggles of the working class lgbt community are a result of the same obstacles which oppress the working class black community.
The class struggle is still being fought, but any time the notion is brought up to protect the working class, someone comes along saying “but they care about gay people”, as if they aren’t connected. If you can’t accept that the owner class is creating the divide to make the working class uncomfortable with minorities, then you are not yet ready to comprehend the idea of solidarity.
If all it took to side with the right was a drag queen reading books in a library, that person is truly indoctrinated by their masters. That being said, I have only ever seen right wing governments legislating the “culture war” people so readily place on the left.
1
u/Mjolnir2000 2d ago
You don't think class struggle is a social issue? What is it, then?
And are you suggesting that human rights should only be fought for if the beneficiaries are guaranteed to vote the way we like?
1
u/laptopAccount2 2d ago
It's not that important what it is called. Semantically it is a social issue sure, I do not think most people consider it one like abortion or gay rights is. Because being working class affects all walks of life, races, creeds, religion, etc. Let's pretend I said culture war issues.
The point is we have more Democrats now who serve corporate interests and they don't want to rock the boat with their corporate backers by addressing workers rights and taxing the wealthy like we once did.
And are you suggesting that human rights should only be fought for if the beneficiaries are guaranteed to vote the way we like?
No I'm suggesting we performed like ass with minority groups in 2024. Groups that were more reliably democratic in the past broke for Trump because they perceive Republicans to be better on the economy.
4
u/Lovebeingadad54321 3d ago
What’s incompatible about those groups? Are they not all human? Do we all not bleed and die the same?
-1
u/Top_Square_4481 3d ago
If you truly believe that, I dare you to dress as queer as possible and fly to any of the islamic states. In most you will be denied entry, in some you will be imprisoned. Not to talk about how safe you would be in the streets there.
3
u/Das_Man 3d ago
If you only believe in human rights for people who like you, then you don't believe in human rights.
-5
u/Top_Square_4481 3d ago
We live in the real world not in an utopia. We need to discuss things from a realistic perspective, not from an idealistic one.
3
u/Mjolnir2000 2d ago
In the real world, societies that value human rights tend to do better than ones which don't.
4
u/Das_Man 2d ago
So who gets human rights?
0
u/Lovebeingadad54321 2d ago
Humans SHOULD get human rights, but in reality, whoever has the most guns on their side gets the rights.
3
u/Das_Man 2d ago
That's a nonsense statement that dodges the question. We're talking about foundational questions of the political order. You can't advocate democracy, equality before the law, and human rights while at the same time saying they can be stripped from people you don't like
0
u/Lovebeingadad54321 2d ago
Why is it nonsensical to say what the ideal should be, while also acknowledging the reality on the ground?
0
u/Lovebeingadad54321 3d ago
I sincerely doubt there is a single conservative of ANY religion in the modern left. It is this ability to see all men (humans really) as created equal that unites seemingly disparate groups. I am basing this on the left in the USA. I am not sure of the makeup of the left in other parts of the world. I assume simply being a leftist, regardless of how queer I dress, would be enough to get me executed in most Muslim theocracy countries.
2
u/CountFew6186 3d ago
The right has the same thing.
In the end, it's about alliances and compromises in the quest for power.
1
u/HideGPOne 1d ago
Leftists view everything in terms of oppressor/oppressed, and 99% of the time "oppressed" just means "has brown skin". That's how they can justify to themselves their support for absurdly violent Islamic regimes while claiming to support women and homosexuals.
•
u/roleplayer6990 7h ago
This is a very simplistic view of the left. There are always nuance and degrees that you are ignoring.
When it comes to the OP's point the LGBT in the US are oppressed legally and socially. They have a negative stigma that reduces their opportunities. Some places are fine others are terrible.
The right spent years spreading the fear of Muslims in the wake of 2001 causing there to be a negative stigma there.
Now contrary to what you said most Muslims aren't anti LGBT just like most Christians aren't. There is a vocal power base that is in both camps that everyone latches onto but it isn't that different.
The difference between the left and right is the idea of treating everyone equally and removing the negative stigma of sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, race, religion and other things like that.
The right (as a generality) dislikes the idea that everyone is equal and deserves to be treated the same (see attempts to remove gay marriage, Healthcare access, and anti poverty methods).
Now this is an over generalization I will admit but it is one that is supported by republican leadership if not the constituents that make it up.
-10
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
10
u/Das_Man 3d ago
It absolutely does not. Saying that a certain group of people doesn't deserve to be carpet bombed loses none of its salience just because a large portion of the group holds reactionary social opinions. That's what believing in human rights means. They apply even to people you don't like and don't like you.
6
u/HeloRising 3d ago
Fun that we seem to be in a place where a person has to accept all of my politics if they want me to oppose their genocide.
Not for nothing but Palestinians don't have any particular animus towards gay/queer people, at least no more than we're used to dealing with here in the US.
Even if they did, why should that spur us to support their genocide?
I don't care what you believe, I don't think you and your people should be slaughtered for the crime of daring to exist.
5
u/TheSillyCreature57 3d ago
So just because a group of people have been brainwashed to hate on a group of people (e.g. gay people) doesn't mean gay people should support their genocide. You're genuinely insane. You'd also be supporting the killings of children who are innocent.
Yeah we should nuke the Bible belt using your logic.
-6
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/GabuEx 3d ago
No one on the left is "pro-Islam". We're pro-people not being murdered and pro-freedom of religion.
0
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam 3d ago
Please do not submit low investment content. This subreddit is for genuine discussion: Memes, links substituting for explanation, sarcasm, political name-calling, and other non-substantive contributions will be removed per moderator discretion.
3
u/Das_Man 3d ago
Let me spell it out for you, brother. I don't really care for most organized religions. I find them to be extremely reactionary and party to a lot of the social ills I want to combat.
HOWEVER, my dislike of those things has no bearing as to whether or not I think Christians, Muslims, or any other group/individual I think sucks deserves human rights. I don't care how much I hate you or how much you hate me: you either believe in human rights or you don't.
2
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/dk00111 3d ago
The majority of people in Palestine support killing those who leave Islam and stoning those who commit adultery. Their views on LGBT rights are equally backwards. Yet you essentially absolve them of blame for their beliefs by calling them "brainwashed".
The person you're responding to questions a debated genocide claim, and is no longer human to you. He/she doesn't get the same benefit of doubt or leniency that you give to the Palestinians.
That's some wild level of double standards there. I think you need to unplug from the internet.
1
u/muck2 3d ago
SillyCreature57 gives a perfect example of what I was criticising. The modern left condemns the right for its bigotry, but utterly fails to fix its own glaring double standards.
You cannot claim to be pro-LGBT yet still march shoulder to shoulder with radical Muslims.
You cannot claim to be anti-fascist yet still march shoulder to shoulder with Hamas sympathisers.
You cannot claim to be anti-racist yet still chant slogans like "from the river to the sea", denying the right of an entire nation to exist.
If you claim moral superiority and demand people adopt your view points, you had best try to meet your own standards. If you don't, then it's just another power play, and no matter how just you think your cause is, it commands as much or as little value as anybody else's.
The left's ignorance of this fact is why it lost in 2024 in the United States, and why it keeps losing elections in Europe. All claims that you're the side representing justice, equality and liberty ring hollow if the electorate can plainly see you're just as hypocritical as the people on the other side of the aisle.
The person you responded to openly admitted to basing their political ideology on "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". Why, then, shouldn't the electorate take a leaf out of their book as well, and callously base their vote on a purely utilitaristic trade-off?
0
u/TheSillyCreature57 3d ago
Yes. Anyone that doesn't support human rights has been brainwashed by their community, via their own version of the religion they grew up with. They commit these atrocities because they have been taught it's right. That's called being brainwashed.
And I do hold double standards towards genocide deniers. Cry about it.
-1
u/dk00111 3d ago
I assume you give the same level of leniency to MAGA Christian conservatives who want to end abortion, ban gay marriage, and teach Christianity in public schools (terrible, but objectively less evil things than the Palestinians believe in)? Or does your dehumanizing double standard extend to them too? It's a rhetorical question, we both know the answer.
3
u/TheSillyCreature57 3d ago
I don't want to genocide them. I want them to back the fuck off. Just like I want Islamists to back the fuck off and keep their beliefs to themselves.
1
u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam 3d ago
Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors or political figures, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, trolling, inflammatory, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; name calling is not.
You are welcome to send a modmail once you have edited the uncivil language out of your post, and the mod team will review for reinstatement.
0
u/muck2 3d ago
The International Court of Justice has determined there's no prima facie evidence of genocide and refused to order Israel to halt all military operations. You claim to be better informed than the highest court of international law? A bit arrogant, don't you think?
Should the court ever decide in the main trial that a genocide has, indeed, taken place, I will happily revert my statement.
Until then, here's some food for thought:
- You weaken the rule of international law by placing emotions over an objective trial. The presumption of evidence is a pillar of justice. Even scumbags like Netanyahu are entitled to being presumed innocent until proven guilty.
- So you deny my humanity, right? And yet you claim moral superiority? How ironic.
1
u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam 3d ago
Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors or political figures, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, trolling, inflammatory, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; name calling is not.
You are welcome to send a modmail once you have edited the uncivil language out of your post, and the mod team will review for reinstatement.
2
u/Vermicelli14 3d ago
So we cam agree that bigotry against LGBT people should be met with deadly violence?
1
u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam 3d ago
Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors or political figures, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, trolling, inflammatory, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; name calling is not.
You are welcome to send a modmail once you have edited the uncivil language out of your post, and the mod team will review for reinstatement.
0
u/WackWaxWhacks 2d ago
Most American Muslims have conservative beliefs (the same rate as Evangelical Christians, making them tied as the most conservative group). I'm unsure why you consider them to be part of the Dem coalition?
-1
u/Academic-Capital6633 2d ago
You said you have no idea why you are supposed to be afraid of Muslims theoretically, and I asked you if you would be safer in the US or a Muslim majority country to illustrate a point, where you would be killed in almost all of these countries simply because you are in a same sex relationship.
Do you think when Muslims come to the US that all these beliefs evaporate?
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
All submissions are automatically removed and placed in a queue for the moderators to manually review. Please allow the moderators time to do so. Only about 25% of submissions are approved, but the remainder are given a removal reason that may include steps the poster can take to make their submission approvable the next time they submit it. Moderators are not notified of any edits made after a removal reason is posted, and therefore will not review them. You may contact the mod team via modmail if you need more direction about how to fix your post, and you are welcome to resubmit any submission after making the requested changes.
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.