• Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    187
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • masquenox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • Wanderer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      How would that even work.

      It’s very very easy to do something like have a capitalist system where business and the rich are taxed. But you aren’t on about that.

      You could divide everything up today. But with change and new business ideas that system will never work. You think the people would want to invest in new automation, new ways of working, new industries. If it means growth and job losses? No never. Just look at the western car industry, or any big government owned industry. People don’t want change, even things like running a factory 24/7 instead of a nice 9-5 is difficult.

      Then Japan’s comes along and does all this new stuff and puts most of the western workforce out of business.

    • hglman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      I, a socialist, hate markets. They are simplistic and functional artifacts of the available way to pass information.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • hglman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Markets have lots of issues; you just named a bunch. Markets are subject to all kinds of hidden information manipulation contrary to prompting non cooperation and solving for individual maximums via exploitation like you literally outlined. Your wish to magically regulate them is just going to be corrupted.

          • Eldritch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Which is why I specifically mentioned decoupling from necessities. Regardless it seems like we are both blocked from the community LOL. But it’s not like I expected more from the community based around memes

      • galloog1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • hglman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          The ole can have criticism without perfect solutions response. Cool, how useless and pointless of you.

            • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, it broadens and deepens understanding.

              Alternatives come from that understanding. Criticism is the fundamental step towards alternatives.

              • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                No, it broadens and deepens understanding

                How exactly do you come to that conclusion?

                Edit: “Thing bad” doesn’t broaden or deepen anything. “Thing has specific shortcomings which aren’t present in specific alternative to thing” is a useful criticism. Criticism without alternatives is just called complaining.

      • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Did… did I say they couldn’t? I think this continues to be a misunderstanding of what socialists believe.

        • galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          So ah… What’s the issue then? You can have what you want under capitalism. Attacking the system is forcing your own on others. This is unironically what makes socialism unpopular in the context of history.

      • CAPSLOCKFTW@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Typically they will want collateral such as your home for a large loan.

            You know the great majority of people don’t have any such collateral, right? Holy privilege, dude

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Own outright? Or have a mortgage?

                Even if, hypothetically, 65% of people owned their homes outright, that’s still over a third of the population who can’t even consider getting a loan like you described.

                And for those that COULD, they’re betting their entire life on it. People with money can afford to take risks. It’s not an even playing field, at all.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only in the most technical of technical senses. Much like “there’s nothing stopping someone who’s born poor from becoming a millionaire”. Legally? No. Practically? Yes, there’s so freakin many barriers to such a thing happening, it’s almost statistically impossible. It’s so rare that when it happens it makes national headlines.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ok now I know you’re a troll. And a liar.

            Poor people who became millionaires exist, but they’re a rounding error. I don’t think you’re one of them, though I bet you tell yourself that. Having daddy pay for your tuition or whatever is just conveniently left out.

            Actually, I bet you’re not even a millionaire.

            Whatever it is, the point is that what you’re claiming is so statistically rare, I don’t believe you. And then you’re also claiming it’s common.

            Ergo, troll.

            I’m done talking with you.

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    120
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Do conservatives on lemmy ever do anything but whine that they’re not immediately worshiped for their opinions?

    • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Conservatives seem to do that everywhere, no matter where they are. Just look at the website formerly known as Twitter… All it has is right wing shitheels and they’ve turned on each other for not worshipping each others opinions. Hell Musk just blocked Catturd2.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        They (the trolling kind) definitely had a system going on Reddit, they haven’t figured it out yet here though.

        On reddit, they whined until the mods started protecting them and every “civility” rule became a “don’t sass the nazis” rule.

        Hopefully lemmy’s mods are better than that.

    • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do conservatives on lemmy ever do anything but whine that they’re not immediately worshiped for their opinions?

      Fixed

    • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      All types of governance and economic systems are susceptible to despotism.

      It takes a constantly educated and involved population to fight it.

      • BleatingZombie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Serious question. Is it possible to do this with very large populations? It seems like it might get inherently more complicated with several tiers of government (federal, state, county, city, etc…)

        • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It definitely feels like Dunbar’s Number is a gate to keep this from being effective in large communities.

          If we can’t view more than a finite amount of other humans as being “real,” how do we begin to get massively large groups of humans to care for one another? This is a question I don’t have the answer to.

    • idunnololz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Honestly I believe this to be a way more important issue to discuss than the whole capitalism vs socialism vs communism vs whatever else argument. If your ideas can easily be perverted by corruption then it won’t work.

      I have some ideas but I’m just some idiot on the internet. I think you need checks and balances. Have at least two groups with similar power at odds with one another. One example is corporation vs government. But I don’t think just 2 groups is good enough. Ideally you probably want 3 groups at the very least. I know many governments around the world already uses this sort of structure internally (eg different branches of government), but I don’t think these solutions take into account the existence of mega corporations that can act across country borders.

    • GreenMario@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Military Intelligence”

      Two words combined that can’t make sense 🎵

  • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    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?

  • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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 🤷

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

  • Filthmontane@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalism is not “when you have markets.” I totally agree that it’s important to have well regulated markets. But capitalism perverts democracy with bribery and lobbying. Democratic Socialism is when you have a democratic government and a democratic economy.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Democratic socialism and capitalism can coexist. As long as the former significantly neuters the latter. Capitalism is (supposed to be) an economic organization, not a political one. It’s just captured the government in the US and other places.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s just captured the government in the US and other places.

        That is a core function of capitalism, not some crazy coincidence. There are market economy models separate from capitalism.

    • masquenox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And when democratic government turns into direct democracy socialism turns into communism

    • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

  • bouh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    There are hardcore liberals around here too. That’s what you get when there isn’t an algorithm to promote fascists.

  • Pectin8747@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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 🙃

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where are these people you’re talking about, because all I see is a sea of red.

    • SMITHandWESSON@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

        • SMITHandWESSON@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You don’t have to worry about that if you have a good job with premium health insurance.

          America is a sink or swim country and there’s no life gaurd on duty. If you want socialism/communism, just move to China, Russia, North Korea, or Cuba because that shit ain’t gonna happen here.

          Sorry

          • Loom In Essence@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            The fact that public healthcare probably won’t happen is different from the argument that we should trust predatory insurance companies.

            Plus you don’t have to go to China for public health care. You could go to Canada or the UK, obviously. And they’re capitalist as fuck. Although capitalism will likely get rid of their public healthcare eventually, they haven’t succeeded yet.

  • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem is that a middle class, can only be a middle class if it’s in between an upper class and a lower class. It’s in the name: MIDDLE class.

  • OneNot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • droans@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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.”

      • Faresh@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m communist but only if I get all the wealth. Also I hate minorities but love the LGBT

        Where did you see that?

        • droans@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a bit of hyperbole, but Lemmygrad and Hexbear aren’t far off.

          A lot of their users believe that Russia is a communist state, not some crony capitalist society that would make Bezos blush. They also seem to really love Trump for some reason.

          • Faresh@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Where did you see someone saying Russia is communist and where did you see some unironically loving Trump?

  • Gecko@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    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…

          • DrownedAxolotl@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re actually the one infantilizing the divide in this case and I’m saying this as a socialist myself.

              • DrownedAxolotl@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                “Both sides bad” is a bad take when applied to economics. In that area, one side is clearly superior. However, when it comes to politics as a whole, specifically social values, the other commenter is right. Now don’t get me wrong, it’s not like I’m crazy about the right’s social values or anything, but I am very critical of some of the stuff the left is promoting lately (and no, I don’t mean just chronically online liberals).

  • tracyspcy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There is not such thing as middle class, pure sophistic. There are only 2 classes, proletariat and bourgeoisie.

  • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

  • books@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    .ml? I always thought it was for Marxist lenninist.

    But that could have been tongue in cheek

    • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • GuyWithLag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s Marxist-Lenninists, and there’s Lenninist-Marxists, and both groups hate each other… Much like the Monty Python sketch…

  • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

      • ThatWeirdGuy1001@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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!!!

          • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not from USA, but from the outside in, it’s pretty obvious what Biden can, and can’t do. You have to take his achievements (which there are many of, unfortunately the dems don’t seem to be very good at trumpeting their actual good works) with the pinch of salt that they haven’t had the control in the senate they need to enact the policies they like. Enough people vote for 3rd party or feel fatigued / despondant like you, that they didn’t get the actual control of senate, and lost the house in midterms.

            Whether it’s slow walking (or blocking) appointments, fake dems like Sinema, dems that have to be stupid-capitalist to maintain power (Manchin), they’ve just not had the numbers.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            My quality of life improved dramatically when I moved away from Republican led areas and into Democrat-led areas.

            Ergo, you are wrong.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I moved to California, so, almost another country.

                But I was speaking more of the state and local governments, which have more of an impact in my direct life.

                However I think anyone who was able to get health insurance with a pre-existing condition would probably say a Democrat president has directly helped their quality of life, possibly in that they would have no life at all without that Democrat president. Just for one example at the federal level.

      • CAPSLOCKFTW@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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…

      • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        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!

          • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I said free healthcare at the point of use, not free healthcare. And it’s nothing like your US systems, I was personally charged £0 for my emergency appendictomy surgery, £0 for the ambulance ride, and £0 for the hospital stay.

    • hglman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.