Lemmy might, MIGHT have a small bias towards the left
Lemmy might, MIGHT have a small bias towards the left
547 comments
-
-
Do conservatives on lemmy ever do anything but whine that they're not immediately worshiped for their opinions?
-
Conservatives? I read this as a SocDem post
-
That’s the problem with this website. It’s full of morons that call anyone that’s to the right of Marx either a conservative or a fascist, never mind the fact that a lot of them defend the fascist invasion of Ukraine.
Fact is, the only system that actually improved the lives of the majority of people when put into practice was the free market social democracy that used to exist in the west before the rise of neoliberalism. But that’s too complex for these simpletons, who can’t comprehend the fact that public ownership can exist alongside private enterprise competing in a market kept free by government regulation. So they just keep shouting about the means of production and hope something will happen.
-
-
Do conservatives
on lemmyever do anything but whinethat they’re not immediately worshiped for their opinions?Fixed
-
Wtf is an uncorrupt government?
-
All types of governance and economic systems are susceptible to despotism.
It takes a constantly educated and involved population to fight it.
-
Exactly. We could also eliminate carbon emissions by moving everything via unicorns and fairy dust.
-
"Military Intelligence"
Two words combined that can't make sense 🎵
-
-
Never older than like 12 hours
-
Bold assumption that it'd take that long
-
-
-
-
I think you will find any place thats well moderated and cracks down on bigotry and hatespeech will skew left.
Weird how that is, huh?
-
Well spoken, dubious fart.
-
-
Most would agree with your point - right up until you suggest that having an "uncorrupt government" is remotely possible.
Pretty much the same level of unrealistic idealism as folks who think it's remotely possible to transition a state to communism without it turning into authoritarianism.
There, now I've pissed off everyone lol
Edit: Except, I guess for the hardcore capitalists, but I assume those guys are all too dumb to read, so no point, really 🤷
-
Luckily an entirely uncorrupt government is not necessary, since that is indeed quite unlikely to ever happen. It is enough to have low corruption, which is much more achievable.
-
Edit: Except, I guess for the hardcore capitalists, but I assume those guys are all too dumb to read, so no point, really 🤷
-
same level of unrealistic idealism as folks who think it's remotely possible to transition a state to communism without it turning into authoritarianism.
same level of unrealistic idealism as folks who think it's remotely possible to transition a state to communism from authoritarianism.
-
No, you're right. Anarchism is the way (:
-
-
Why do you want a middle class? So you have a class to aspire to and a class to denigrate? Why do you want classes?!
-
Profoundly internalized hierarchy all over this thread.
-
Classes will always exist if there are limited resources. Which there currently is and always will be for the foreseeable future. The gaps, size, number of, and mobility between them can vary though. But scarcity will always create at least two classes.
-
Did you know we throw away more food than it would take to feed the hungry? That there are more empty homes than homeless people? Capitalism incentivizes scarcity, so it is artificially created. The only thing stopping us from achieving post scarcity immediately is working out the logistics, but those in power don't want that to happen, as they are currently high up in society.
-
People are always going to have vision problems, so it's wrong to wear glasses.
-
-
Class will always exist but it's been proven that a strong middle class is a sign of a bountiful economy that actually works for it's workers.
The shrink of the American middle class is exactly what's caused most of the economic issues in America.
We allowed our middle class to be destroyed in an attempt to raise a few of those people to the top. Because upper middle class people were duped into believing they were closer to being rich than they were to being poor
-
Class should absolutely be something we strive to abolish. The idea that some people deserve to benefit disproportionally from the workings of our society is nonsense.
-
I want a middle class so strong everyone is in it. In fact let’s get rid of the upper and lower classes
-
Class will always exist
A good reminder that liberalism is based around unfounded assumptions and charlatan, unimaginative predictions of the future. Everyone used to think kings were inevitable, too.
-
-
-
-
There's only one kind of democratic economy and we already have a word for it - it's socialism. If the means of production isn't owned by the workers it's not democratic. It's not socialist.
-
And when democratic government turns into direct democracy socialism turns into communism
-
Exactly markets aren't the distinction, communist and socialist democracies all have markets. A really interesting model of that was Allende's Project Cybersyn in Chile before the US sponsored fascist coup that put Pinochet in charge. There's highly regulated markets within capitalist countries as well, bulk energy is largely very "designed" and regulated markets.
The Marxian view of socialism would consider it as a transition state between capitalism and communism. While someone may be ideologically communist, they will likely have more political opportunities catering to socialist policies in capitalist democracies with a "left" party. Revolutionaries don't believe this is possible, and argue capitalism's structure won't be threatened by socialist policies unless a revolution occurs, and might even consider comrades who support socialist parties as "not real" communists. Germany's socialist party supporting ww1 is often used in forms of this argument.
Ultimately in a lot of these capitalist democracies, there are individual leftists but no real political power, this is certainly the case in the US. Working to raise class-consciousness and labor organizing is basically the front of whatever left exists there. It's a bleak time to be on the left, and sometimes I wish I could have the enthusiasm of the self-righteous liberals who naively think that if everyone regardless of identity was distributed equally in the capitalist system everything would be right and fair.
-
although how do you want to achieve a democratic economy? voting? 🤣 corrupt politics and capitalism are symbiotic. how do you plan on getting rid of just one of them.
-
My experience has been the opposite. I've found that the majority of users tend to lean towards neoliberal and center-right ideologies. I guess most of them are probably American, so their warped worldview has them considering these ideologies as 'left-wing' instead 🙃
-
Same!
-
Because those of us that are center-right/right believe in less government. I wouldn't trust the US government with my dogs health, let alone my own.
-
Cumming to my relentless trust for insurance agency middlemen.
-
I just wanna let you know, I'm an American leftist and I have that exact same distrust in government. I don't want less government but rather none of it at all. Unfortunately, before that might become possible, a lot of the policies I advocate for do indeed require more regulations and bureauctats.
-
Bottom line to me is, no I don't trust the government at all. Unfortunately the options are the government and private insurance. and seeing how the government is the only thing that stops them from charging super sky high premiums, and then find excuses not to cover anything when you get sick.
-
-
-
Honestly, I think capitalism wouldn't be so bad if it was limited to what it's good at. Fashion, tech, entertainment, snacks, ect.
But essential food, housing, water, healthcare, even electricity and internet access, the idea that these things that will always have infinite demand is haphazardly controlled through profit motive is disgusting.
Infrastructures should be government controlled and free. Essential resources should have some sort of universal basic "food stamps" system. Then actual money just becomes the luxury "fun bucks" that you don't lose out on if you don't have a lot. For example pet owners would be given a credits for pet food and free vet care, but a silly pet costume would use money.
Disclaimer: This is just a personal idea I've been mulling over, I'm sure there's a million holes in it.
-
Markets don't "create wealth". People's work creates wealth. Banks don't create wealth, they create debt and allow more money to go into circulation than actually exists.
Regulation isn't only desired, it's crucial for any market economy to work, lest they devolve into corrupt, abusive monopolies and oligopolies. Granted, bad regulation can be equally abusive and real cases are plentiful.
Just as important as regulation is taxing who has more money, because generating wealth won't automagically distribute it in any ideal manner. The worst problem nowadays is just how easy it is for rich assholes to legally evade taxes no matter which country they're from.
-
-
Some could still like capitalism and ditch Reddit for Lemmy, because it's about the customer's choice and "voting with the money". Reddit is no monopoly on its category of application (or else Lemmy wouldn't exist), but it's pretty big. But, for the ones that still use Reddit... Let's say that they like being stepped on by corpos when they can just leave
-
-
I agree! Let me know when you find an uncorrupt government or uncorrupt corporation.
-
Market != Capitalism. You can have a free market without capitalism, and capitalism without a free market.
The hexbears will attack me for saying that a regulated free market is good and a planned economy is bad. The others will attack me for saying that capitalism is bad and that we should have market socialism instead. But if we can't have that, a capitalist free market has proven much less bad than any planned economy, as long as it's regulated enough that it stays free.
-
Since nobody agrees with terminology, we might as well just say: we should do Scandinavia
-
That's the thing, when people say free market they mean a unregulated one and not a social democracy, markets are a effective tool to generate wealth and progress but they don't spread that wealth very well and profit over everything isn't a great way to help people so you need heavy regulations and certain areas shouldn't be under market control at all because people can't choose to use them!
-
-
I wish it was just "towards the left".
I'm very much on the left socially and left of center economically, but even I feel like every other comments section on here reads like some insane tankie commune.
-
It's always a weird flavor, too. Like "I'm communist but only if I get all the wealth. Also I hate minorities but love the LGBT."
For some reason it just makes me think of Dennis on 30 Rock. "Fiscally liberal, socially conservative."
-
-
There are hardcore liberals around here too. That's what you get when there isn't an algorithm to promote fascists.
-
Boot-flavored capitalist Kool-Aid must be so refreshing during such a torrid summer
-
"uncorrupt government"
😂😂😂
-
-
That is why we throw them out every couple of years and choose someone different.
I do the same with my underpants.
-
-
My underpants are also corrupt
-
would be nice, but doesn't seem to really happen, (incumbancy advantage). Also the bigger problem that isn't solved by voting them out or even term limits. Access to money is important to win an election. Same people have money, those people pick candidates that are loyal and see to it that they win. When one old corrupt politician dies we'll get a new one pushed by the corporate media.
-
So you bought then back in June 1933 and didn't have the heart to throw them out?
-
-
A leftie who tells you the government can be "uncorrupt" deserves all the laughter you can aim at them.
-
Uncorrupt is impossible, maybe it is better to advocate for low levrls of corruption. Less corruption --> less damage.
-
-
I've seen this sentiment being repeated in the replies, yet this also applies to private companies that are run by absolutely powerful people. It's true that Lord Acton wrote this about the monarchy, but some execs in multinational corporations today are just as powerful as old-timey monarchs.
-
-
cliches are lame
-
-
In today's skewed political spectrum, "Left" is what would be considered moderate in a reasonable perspective.
-
Yes, my view point is also the most reasonable.
-
That's one big problem with political discussions, everyone having them thinks their own views are the correct ones. Then there's the problem of politics in international communities, did you know that what's right and left can be entirely different in different countries and different cultures?
It's why I avoid political discourse and I try not to refer to myself or others as right or left.
-
-
It's sad for the American infused internet that demanding more worker rights is purposely exaggerated as "left and extreme left" instead of a moderate and reasonable take. Luckily Europe has so much social-democrat development
-
-
Pity, you have to defend your ideas in a free market of thought.
-
Market ain’t correctly regulated. Monopolistic practices are being used to suppress non conforming thoughts. :P
-
Reform VS revolution is basically always the debate in a movement.
Yes there is evidence that welfare for the people was able to provide the middle class in the US with wealth. And democratic socialism seems to be working well in Europe.
But the threat of the rich coming back and taking it is very really. Reagan in the 80s. Brexit. Other "populist" movements in other countries.
Half hearted reform barely works for the poor and we're always an election or two away from shit.
So I kind of get both sides.
-
Who's the monopoly here on Lemmy? The collective group of individuals that disagree with you? Because that's almost the literal opposite of a monopoly.
-
-
-
It's weird. It's almost like educated people skew left. So very weird...
-
-
There will always be a distribution of wealth. The key thing is how broad that distribution is.
-
Yeah, there's no problem with a meritocracy as long as the top and the bottom of the gradient aren't (literally can't pay bills -> more money than you could ever spend.)
Like in no sane world would people willingly become surgeons for the same pay as a sanitation worker, that's just fucking stupid. Why spend a decade going through school to be a doctor when you could just go pick up trash and make the same money? We have to have some kind of variation in pay scale or society wouldnt function.
Like you said, how much difference between the top and the bottom definitely doesn't have to be what it is.
-
-
-
The statement in the image is just loaded with terminology that comes with a lot of baggae. It's no surprise people tear into it. Can't speak to whether that makes them leftist or just poly sci students.
"Uncorrupt" misunderstands the nature of corruption. How do you envision resolving the interests of the forces that give validity to said government while still keeping a capitalist structure?
"Generate wealth" presupposes a specific kind of wealth created by the government and given validity by the capitalist structure. You win at the rules of the game you made up. "Middle class" has a similar problem. "Prosperity" to a nation starving under the global capitalist regime might look quite different. Why use one benchmark over the other? Because of the game you want to choose.
-
I just really dislike the whole left/right tribalism. Politics is a lot more complex than left/right and just marking someone as either just increases polarisation...
-
-
All great social media does. The secret is that reality favors the progressive left
-
I believe you are probably right. the problem is that capitalists only focus is profit. so if their profit is limited by this hypothetical non-corrupt government they will try their absolute best to make sure they get their way in the government, and since they have a lot of money they also have the power to do that.
also the ideology of endless growth for the sake of growth (how capitalism works) is literally impossible on a planet with limited recourses
-
I'm lower-left quadrant but always cop a fair amount of shit from others on 'the left' (nebulous term though it is) for my feelings on capitalism. The people I speak to have never seen anything but corruption, and have a combo of zero faith and utter hatred for it.
My personal feelings are that with strong, enforced checks & balances, capitalism can be combined with socialist policies to create a fantastic standard of living (see Norway), without it becoming cancerous. Unfortunately most of our western political systems (and capitalism is strongly influenced by political systems) seem to be run on a wink and a nudge, an assumed sense of 'fair play' which we all know has been shown to be worthless in recent years.
Strong unions; an educated populace; politicians who actually give a shit; this is what we need. But, capitalism has an absolute stranglehold on the populace of most western countries via print / tv media. The foxes are in charge of the henhouse and the hens are getting shit on.
-
-
except our bad two party system.
Well, and the corporate owned media with a hypercapitalist agenda, all the lobby organisations, the lack of proper public education for centuries, red-blue-whitewashed historytelling, the oppression of the black minority, a deeply flawed election system, the imprisonment crisis, and related the opiod crisis, gerrymandering, not enough unions, the fucked up healthcare situation itself...
-
Yeah yeah two parties bad we fuckin know but talk to us when both sides start hard shoving for the removal of human rights. Talk to us when Republicans stop gerrymandering voting maps because they know it's the only way they'll get elected.
It's not fucking both sides it's one side actively shitting all over the country while the other side gets blamed for it. Meanwhile half our citizens have been so dumbed down that they can't remember any Republican scandal longer than 5 god damn minutes.
bUt HeR eMaIlS!!
BuT hUnTeR bIdEn!!
bUt TrUmPs DiCk Is So TaStEy!!!
-
You can have socialist policies without being a socialist society. Our (UK) NHS is a socialist policy, free healthcare at the point of use. My country is decidedly not socialist!
-
Nothing stops people from voting for these things in America either
except our bad two party system.Ftfy. Nothing stops anyone from voting for it right now. There's only one side even remotely fighting for it. It's just ignorance, laziness, and hate that keep it from happening.
-
-
You are not a leftist is probably why.
-
What matters is the ability the allocate resources according to the needs of us all and that people have confidence in future resources to be happy. Private ownership is contrary to the first; it helps with the second. That is any "capitalism" must be limited to pertonal needs.
-
Socialism has many of the same benefits as capitalism. It's also compatible with other systems. A socialist country can trade with a capitalist. I have no issue with slowly moving toward socialist but I don't think there is much to be gained in protecting capitalism.
-
This I think is a key part of misunderstandings... I'm not trying to protect capitalism, I'm trying to be realistic in how we go about modifying society towards more socialist goals. We're not going to upend the global capitalist systems in our lifetime, I don't think. And imo things are going to get worse before they get better, as wealth continues to be concentrated in fewer hands, as productivity increases due to further automation. I hope the tipping point isn't something that causes massive loss of life, like the collapse of civilisation.
It's like... imagine you have a lake filled with crocodiles, sharks, and jellyfish. We need to get to the other side. Wanting to get there isn't enough, we need a solution. We can just keep endlessly pushing people in expecting them to somehow cross the lake (trying to 'destroy' capitalism), or we can build a bridge across (slowly modify capitalism to have strongs checks and balances). Anyway it's just my personal opinion, I stand by it
-
-
uncorrupt government
I think you meant "free real estate for the CIA and their a puppet dictators".
It's what happens every time another country doesn't want to sell their natural resources for pennies.
-
I'm actually very centrist; I don't want to eat the rich.
After all, I'm a vegan and think that anyone involved in the meat industry should be put in jail.
So, dead center. That's me.
-
-
It's always funny to me when regressives try to put themselves on the political spectrum.
-
Ok, but what if it wasn't meat industry, but rather self-organized community eating of the rich?
-
bing vegan is the most left thing there is
-
-
I'm not even sure what a government would look like in order to allow capitalism to function without corruption and exploitation. The regulations needed would be so overbearing that the markers surely would not thrive. Our entire society is based around the idea of abusing what is essentially slave labor to live far beyond our means. Without massive corruption, the US would just be another unremarkable country struggling to stay afloat.
-
The market isn't thriving right now either for the majority of people.
Maybe we should try being overbearing once, because giving businesses free reign certainly hasn't helped.
-
-
But 'we'd be better off in a world free of corruption' isn't a right-leaning position.
-
The world was a better place when politicians had to worry about get tarred and feathered, quartered, or thrown out of windows.
-
-
the amount of dogshit takes here is depressing. This guy just praised the chinese government.
-
The Chinese government is responsible for the biggest and fastest uplift of people out of poverty ever seen in history.
And they are also responsible for horrible horrible human rights violations against minorites and dissidents and they caused millions of needless deaths during the cultural revolution.
The second fact however does not negate the first one because they did, in fact, pull almost their entire population out of poverty and into a modern industrialized economy.
Please learn to make some space in your head for uncomfortable facts that cause conflicting emotions.
OP was right, they are an extremely successful government with a surprisingly broad support within the population because most Chinese have living grandparents that where still farmers and had no industry at all. And they now live in modern cities with modern amenities. The transformation happened in two generations.
-
And? Do you believe that they're 100% evil doing nothing worthy of praise and wherever you are is "good"? And you say others have dogshit takes?
-
-
-
-
If money can make money that feedback loop will always break the system
-
middle class is an illusion
-
Yeah, because of capitalism and how rich the rich have become.
Its like 99% of us all have this big smelly turd. Everyone is fighting to touch the turd.
Theres an enourmous amount of people at the bottom who are just about able to put a finger on the turd. The working class.
A few more who are standing on their shoulders who have managed to get a hand or two on the big turd. The middle class.
And the rest have managed to climb ontop of the turd. The upper class.
Then theres rich people who are shitting out the turd and flushing it away.
The reality is, we all fight to be a higher class of people but compared to people like elon and trump we are all one class. The great big turd class.
-
It used to exist to a degree, but has been erased over the last sixty years or so. Gee, I wonder what was going on back then that resulted in punishment for the people.
-
-
I hadn't experienced hexbear (literally) shitting up the place yet, has a way to block entire instances been implemented or do I gotta find a new one that isn't federated with them?
-
I'm using Connect and it provides an option to block an instance
-
Yeah I was using lemm.ee but the hexbear spam in the threads was ridiculous. They were swarming the meta thread discussing defederating them too, and it seemed like the instance admin was determined to keep federating with them. Went on the hunt to join a popular instance that doesn't federate with them. There's a few out there that do block the annoying authoritarian/boot-licking trifecta of lemmygrad, explodingheads, and hexbear. Sopuli.xyz was the one I ended up joining.
-
Just block the main communities that pop up. Most of their shit disappears of you block like five hexbear communities and lemmygrad.
-
On Lemmy itself it hasn't been implemented, though there is an issue related to it on their github. There are clients that do it but it's client-side only at the moment.
-
Next update will allow you to personally defederate with them even if your instance hasn't. If you'd like. You can also very easily migrate to a new instance, if you'd prefer thaf route.
-
Keyword being uncorrupt.
Governments are run by people, at the end of the day
-
Humans will be humans. You can't eliminate corruption, but you can work to fight it. Every day. Forever...
-
Sounds like a job for Super-Sisyphus
-
-
-
Private companies are also run by people. "The market" is also affected by people making imperfect decisions all the time, waiting for it to self regulate is...well, I mean, aren't we still waiting?
-
The problem is politics and government becoming part of the market where laws, regulations and power can be sold and bought, if not for money then for influence.
-
Markets don't self-regulate, though
-
-
This
-
-
yeah!! if MY party was in power, the government would not be corrupt!!! its definitely not the system that is flawed
-
That's why I am here tbh
-
Left are the goodies
Right are the baddies.
Simples.
-
.ml? I always thought it was for Marxist lenninist.
But that could have been tongue in cheek
-
I related ML to Machine Learning, since tons of ML tools hosted in .ml, it turns out that it was just a free domain from Malasia.
-
-
I heard the Lemmy creators are indeed MLs (leftists who worship russia or whatever)
-
There's Marxist-Lenninists, and there's Lenninist-Marxists, and both groups hate each other.... Much like the Monty Python sketch...
-
-
The problem is how do we get there? In a market there will always be actors powerful enough to corrupt the governmenta and influence regulation in an undemocratic way.
-
Even in a market dominated by socialist companies where workers have power. Workers having ownership isn't some panacea against corruption and willingness to dominate others. You can still end up with a company full of terrible people who have no qualms cornering a market and then committing to rent-extraction. They can even commit to those horrible practices in an internally democratic way!
-
-
-
That's an extremely narrow view point I'd say. In my country the government promotes the growth of existing big corporations so that there can be more jobs and infrastructure development - but this has in the end lead to a widening of gap and has essentially only made the rich even richer.
I genuinely believe promoting start ups is better for the middle class than big corporations, as usually startups pay a crazy amount of money if you ask for it compared to what a big rich corpo would give you (ironically).
-
Monopolies have been allowed to take over large portions of the markets (amazon, google, windows etc). Startups need more backing and protection from government sources. Without competition we get screwed in the long term.
-
Start up are a fraud to society. It's funded either by private funds or society. Then either it fails or it succeed, and if it succeed, it's bought by a megacorp or investment fund for cheap until it grows to give even more money to these already rich people.
Results are rich people are richer, society funds the risk of the concept and research, and private corps get the tech to profit from it.
It's capitalism these days anyway : society covers for risks, private investors take the profits.
-
The con is that your startup could die tomorrow
-
Yep. It's high risk high reward.
-
That means now there is enough money to start two more
-
I went into a startup job. It's not a con because everyone knows that your job is less secure, and employers have to figure out how to incentivize their employees to be willing to stick around. Absolutely zero people were under the impression a startup job would be secure in the long run.
If you're in a good startup, it can be a great way to take some of that venture capital funding as your wages. If you're in a bad one, at least job hopping isn't that rare so you can just move on to your next job and it's a normal thing.
Our world is shaped by those capitalists, but that doesn't mean these jobs are a con.
-
-
-
What this planet needs is a Magna Carta of sorts that limits the power of all people, corporations or other entities or groups. Simple as that. We need limits! Extreme inequality will ALWAYS breed civil unrest.
-
I'm confused by something. Isn't this meme pretty far left compared to reality?
-
What exactly makes it "far left"?
Uncorrupt governments? No, far left (at least an anarchist far left) is realising that that's a pipedream.
A "healthy middle class"? Lol, leftism is all about eradicating the class system entirely, it's one of the biggest reasons liberals aren't leftist.
-
And the joke is that Lemmy users are much further left than that.
-
Nah, unless you find anacho-communists here, but it's unlikely to find them because they usually roam in decentralized(p2p), not in federated.
-
I'm so left. I'm miles to the left. Keep going. And going.
-
-
-
Reality has a leftist bias.
-
-
Uncorrupt is good.
-
Uncorrupt government. Lmao
-
-
I think it's not that they have a leftist bias here, but that they have a Marxist bias. I find I get drowned, or just mass-accused of being a liberal, for simply not being a Marxist.
The false claim that Marxism is the endpoint of "left" (and that anyone who isn't Marxist is to the right of them) is silly and makes it hard to have useful conversation even if you don't care about downvotes.
-
-
The amount of left wing folks on some of the more extreme instances bashing the most left wing people in the American Democratic party because they're not complete socialist idiologes is just wild. Like I want to see a major shift towards some form of democratic socialism in America and think we definitely need real change in that direction, but the hatred for elected officials closest to your views just because they aren't extreme enough for you is silly.
I don't understand why they feel the need to attack the left win branch of the DNC when Joe Manchin equists. When the Republican party exists. Focus efforts on some positive change and getting people you want in office instead of trying to tear down what should be an ally. Make the people you think aren't extreme left enough the conservatives of a new wave. The defeatest attitude that just criticizes the closest thing they have to what they want is just silly.
Other than a violent change of the guard/revolution. It's not going to be an instant process. You have to accept small progress where you can get it.
-
Imagine talking about being a real leftist wanting real leftist stuff but calling the Democratic Party the furthest left thing in America. Jesus fucking Christ.
-
Hatred of allies: NO
Holding our allies' feet to the fire: YES
We should not meekly accept a few crumbs.
We should fight, unapologetically, for 100% of everything we want to see. When did the right wing tea party say "Thank you for meeting us half way, we are so grateful, we will now go along to get along." Never. The right wing get 80% of everything they want from an absolute minority position precisely because they fight for 100% of everything they want 100% of the time. The left needs to pay attention.
There are no long term allies, only long term interests.
-
-
Folks don't realize real change can't happen drastically and realistically be expected to remain. It's going to be baby steps. Getting them to believe gradual change isn't worth fighting for is a great way to maintain the status quo. They don't raise they are their own worst enemies.
-
Exactly. It sucks, but it's just the truth. I'd love to vote for an openly socialist presidential candidate, but we have to slowly shift the political views for a long while before that's viable.
-
Are you seriously arguing against the French Revolution right now? What the fuck is wrong with liberals I stg
-
Gradual change sets the conditions for drastical change.
-
-
"You talk clean and bomb hospitals So I speak with the foulest mouth possible"
- RTJ
And I think we're aware things won't happen quickly, but that doesn't mean we have to be uncritical of capitalist politicians who are also actively hostile to leftism.
Also every inherently flawed, means tested, half measure liberal policy that gets confused for leftism (like Obamacare, which was based on Heritage Foundation ideas) just makes it harder to get support on the left.
-
-
So does reality, strangely enough.
-
-
-
I'm an anarchist and I agree with this. The main reason I am an anarchist is because I don't believe it's actually possible for a government to be uncorruptible, so I'd rather not have one.
It's like saying "the world would be better if it was a utopia." No shit. But how likely is it to happen?
-
-
-
The video below offers a nice exploration on left v right in terms of the conditions in a nation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs
I think, personally and without solid justification, that our generation is a sacrificial one. If we accept our lives as being imperfect, but aim to reduce the imperfection of those that come after, we're on the best path. Planting trees whose shade we'll never sit in, with the caveat we're also helping people see that the shade is more valuable than the lumber, and that the world always needs more of both.
-
Really depends on what you mean by market. Like a market has existed since humans have and probably will until post-scarcity. The market we have now with arcane rules that all end up enriching people with more money than any one human will ever need is something that has been in the making since industrialization. That market is pretty much at a point where salvaging it is not really possible even if there was any attempt made to do so. Control of how that market works seems to be at the hands of bad actors who just want to squeeze as much wealth out of it as they can, screwing over anyone else.
Like for example the power companies in my country stopped producing power on their own and bought power from neighboring countries just to sell it to locals at a higher rate. Basically just acting as middle men without providing anything of worth. That drove the price of power to hit 300% more than the year prior. The only reason they stopped was because our government started their own power plan with locally produced power forcing those companies to compete with it but the damage was done and power prices never went back to normal like they never do when companies inflate prices. A market regulated by people who only care about profit will never work.
-
it's not left it's middle
-
sure, when the government looks like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goulash_Communism
-
Half?
-
Keep in mind, you are posting this to lemmy.ml, so I don't know what you expected... Maybe something like this would be better recieved on lemmy.world or on your account's instance.
-
Why should some people be allowed to be rich but not most people?
-
And a very specific type of left, too. I'm a democratic socialist who doesn't believe in centrally planned economies and thinks market mechanisms can be useful in many cases (but can also be extremely harmful if done wrong or utilized wrong, eg healthcare is a terrible place for market mechanisms and profit motives), but I might as well be a reich-winger based on how many subs seem to look at democratic socialism (let alone market socialism)
-
-
Sounds like you don't understand the difference between democratic socialism and social democracy. I suggest Wikipedia
-
-
-
-
Okay, but you're being incredibly insensitive by referring to the LGBT crowd the way you just did. You're dehumanizing them, which is exactly the kind of behavior the people you're talking about are trying to stop.
Gender is a spectrum, it's a fact, not an ideology.
Besides that, I do think the culture wars have been pushed onto the working classes in order to divide us so that food insecurity, homelessness, and climate change are not prioritized and our pockets can continue to be picked for the distribution of wealth straight to the top. If we could all stop fighting each other over the minutiae or how people live their lives, we might be able to push politicians to fix higher-level, systemic issues.
-
That hasn’t really been my experience, talking to a lot of people tends to seem like most people seem closer to my age 30s with an interest in tech or a tech background.
I haven’t really run into many teenagers in discussions.
-
-
You literally left Reddit because of what capitalism did to it.
-
In This Thread: politically illiterate takes
You are all just closeted leftists if you understood a bit more political theory. Go out and be the non-annoying, non-smug leftist that you dream of.
-
It also has a very clear male bias, significantly more so than reddit used to.
-
You need to be 2 times as nerdy to understand lemmy, so it’s obvious
-
Reddit was no different from 2005 ~ 2009/2010
Edit: and honestly. Still.
-
Maybe it's just because I am usually in LGBT and trans spaces, but I see a lot more women than I did on Reddit. They might not all be cis women but still.
-
-
Tbh all i saw when i joined lemmy was baby trans spaces and i blocked all of those 😐
-
-
-
Reality is not left leaning. Leftist politics are reality-leaning
-
Finally, a capitalist on Lemmy! I’ve been looking for you. I need another like-minded Lemmy user.
-
Got bombarded with hate when I said a solution to Nazis isnt to kill Nazis lol the left are just as unhinged as the right. Most Americans are mentally ill because they can't afford to see a therapist.
-
I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word 'bias'
-
With very few exceptions this entire thread is pure amateur hour bullshit.
-
-
Thanks for sharing bro bro we really care
-
-
What a system is capable of doing initially for a lucky fraction of the populace and where its inevitable and terrible end leads for the vast majority are two entirely different things.
-
-
You got downvoted but you are correct. It raises it higher for some more than others but it does improve for everyone.
-
The problem in the US is it's so lightly regulated that we we living under an oligarchy in the name of "freedom."
-
-
-
This is the only place i see where auth left is represented and i love it
-
-
Yeah but I'm not going too deep into it
-
-
-
ok but how do you prevent the government from being influenced by the wealth of individuals. let me know when you find a way
-
The problem with that view is that it is idealistic in nature - government, by its very nature, will always become corrupt.
-
the rich poor disparity problem is unsolvable unless the solution is total control of the market and complete socialism.
Because for example I wanna take the risk and invest my money to start a buisness only if I can get a equally rewarding return in profit. Why else should I take that much risk and effort? It's not like already established buisnesses starting a new one from scratch is incredibly risky until and if it grows big enough.
So in any economy where there won't be having the incentive, no one will care enough to start any buisness. That makes it the govt's job to literally run all the buisnesses to make every single product for every niche community, whetger it's essential, luxury, hobbyist etc. And the govt can only manage so much. This is why socialist economy crumble in comparison to capitalist ones. Because in capitalist economy you MAY be rewarded for taking the risk, so people come up with all sorts of innovative stuff to become big. The downside, some of them become so successful that they become too big.
-
This meme is based on an impossible assumption, maybe that's the joke. But I ain't certain.
-
-
Your point is based on an idealistic and wishful "uncorruot government". You cannot have an uncorrupt government. What's needed is a different form of political decision making, one where the common folk participates in the political questions, not just some answers, where accountability is protected and a priority.
I don't know the exact blueprint for this, maybe it is as unattainable as an "uncorrupted government". What I know is that nobody really tried it yet, while so called "liberal democracy" has proven its failings to all and the fascist have been taking advantage of those failings since the start. The only way yo avoid this is to change our questions, not to all agree on the answers
-
It can. In theory.
The theoretical part is the "uncorrupt government" you speak of.
The only way to keep a govt "uncorrupt" as you put it is under pain of literal death. And even then its not foolproof. Some will still be tempted.
If you want a govt that will serve the people while being as incorruptible as possible you have to choose politicians by lottery instead of election. They get called, go serve, then go back to the life they had before. Like 4 years of Jury Duty. Political graspers, climbers, those will always trend towards corruption. Like that old addage, anyone actively seeking political office is unfit to serve in that capacity as their motivations are suspect. Power, authority, etc. All that is only intensified in a system as inconceivably corrupt and broken as ours is.
-
A bit late to the party
-
-
That's why I'm here. All the corporate owned social media are blatantly far-right fascists. Everywhere else is just thick with Nazis and racists.
-
-
-
*Small bias? Just try mentioning Trump in a positive light and see.
-
Who could ever want anything else?
-
That's just what happens when you actually ban pedo-nazis and racists instead of passively protect them like reddit does.
-
sami"\loda\
-
The problem there is the same as that of idealised communism, you're relying on humans to do what they typically don't do. Humans will take for themselves at the cost of communities if they feel they can get away with it, including the ones in government.
-
sami'\loda\
-
The SEC ??
-
sami"\alert(document.cookie)\
-
Implying the other half agrees with you, right?
Sounds about like every other wedge issue we're divided (lol auto correct decided that should be"focused"and 8 don't know that I disagree) with.
-
Almost 1000 likes says is not such an heavy bias i would say.
-
It will be a while before weird gringo ideologies become less prevalent.
-
-
except of course no government can regulate a Freed market.
If we truly Freed the market of government controls the workers could ownership of the fruits of their labor and the laws of supply and demand would regulate the market naturally
-
That doesn't last for long. Corporations make money, they use that money to gain infuence in government, they change the regulations to suit themselves and make even more money off the backs of workers, consumers and the government, and you lose that well regulated market under an uncorrupt government. This is a feature of the system, not a bug.
-
sami
547 comments
Socialists don't hate markets, they hate workers not having any power or democratic choice in how they interact in the market.
Workers owning the means of production just means the workers are doing the same work but they are in ownership of the factory and the profits. They will still sell the products they produce in a marketplace.
There is no rule that states they have to sell squat in a marketplace. They could, but they also couldn't. That's the whole point of the workers owning the means of production - the workers involved makes those deicisions, not a capitalist or bureaucratic parasite class.
I, a socialist, hate markets. They are simplistic and functional artifacts of the available way to pass information.
Cool, what is your preferred replacement and does everyone in this thread agree? You have managed to continue criticism but not offer a replacement yet again.
I, a socialist don't. I think however they should be tightly regulated. And kept away from basic necessitys.
Markets have proven time and again to only serve oligarchs, or create oligarchs to serve. When left to their own wont. If we can choose to participate or not in the markets. Then there is no issue with markets. When we're slaves to the markets as we currently are however. No one is free.
So, you would never trade with someone else something you have for something they have? You want to be entirely self sufficient?
If this isn't true, why do think markets serve no purpose?
Did... did I say they couldn't? I think this continues to be a misunderstanding of what socialists believe.
Nothing stops them! except shitty wages that are not enough to pay your absurdly high bills for housing, utility and shitty food plus competition which does not treat their eorkers fair and is therefore much more profitable and can easily destroy your worker-friendly cooperative, which they totally will do because CAPITALISM
Fully stop? No, not technically. But our society makes it as close to impossible as it can be without being illegal
Banks frequently do.
Do they actually trust their coworkers to run the company without tanking it almost immediatly? Most of my coworkers can barely make it through their own tasks without fucking something up, let alone actually having input on how the business is run.
I trust my average coworker much more than the average CEO.
Some of the workers may be managerial. But the managerial workers don't own a disproportionate amount of the company, and they're not considered the "superior" of any other workers.
You must need a better job. I've had plenty of workplaces where I could count on everyone around me.
You know, the hiring manager usually has something to do with the quality of people hired. Maybe you could talk to them instead?
This is a problem with the company you work for, not your coworkers. I'm sure if they were paid more, were given more agency, and received better training, they'd be better elployees
I guess you haven't met many CEOs, then.
Didn't say they run it. The person who runs it can be simply another employee. It's just there are no outside investors and everyone has a vote on the board. You put someone in charge you trust but everyone as a whole has a say in big picture stuff with the person at the top being day to day and being held accountable to employees and not investors.
Capitalism fundamentally changes the relationship between workers and their work. One takes the value they create and gives it to someone else. One doesn't.
@lightnsfw @dingus
You really think the people currently running your company are any different from those other coworkers?
You must be a joy to work with.
If worker-owned workplaces still operate within a market, there will still be pressure to compete with other companies. People can still come up with new ideas to compete and change can still happen.
We love oversimplifying generalizations that make us look like absolute buffoons though.
At least according to trustworthy sources, i.e. your gut feeling.
/s
Or as normal people call it, "money"
So every company remodeled after REI, got it.