• M500@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is me and my dad so much.

    Last year he was complaining about how the owner of the company he works for is retiring and giving the company to his son who doesn’t know anything about the business.

    We talked about how the workers could all own a portion of the company and run it themselves.

    He agreed that’s how it should work.

    But socialism is bad… 🤦‍♂️

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    For real, especially trying to get across Lenin’s analysis of Imperialism, or the necessity of Revolution, both of which are far touchier subjects than “Marx good” on the Fediverse.

    Marx has been blunted and made tame and by those who haven’t read him.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        Excellent thread. Even suggesting Lenin has good ideas can get you immediate ire, because what he wrote is accurate and practicible.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          Indeed, Lein’s work is highly relevant today. For example, The State and Revolution directly addresses the debates over reformism and the nature of the state that we see constantly happening right now. It’s depressing to see all the same arguments replayed as if we don’t have historical evidence to lean on to decide which ones were correct.

          • anarcho_blinkenist@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I suggest Rosa Luxemburg’s Reform or Revolution to break people out first, less scary than Lenin, and a I think a “woman’s touch” does a thing for peoples minds under patriarchal norms, with the assumption that they’re somehow less capable of all of the things they’re afraid of. It was critical in my political education when I was starting off grabbing from everywhere to see what gripped the road I saw us flying down (Conquest of Bread sucked, never read more ‘kum-ba-ya’ utopian idealist tripe in my life, and I could tell that having barely even read much Marx at that point); and Reform or Revolution is more focused on dismantling the single topic. From there, once the reader are forced to mull on that reform will never save us, haunted by their discomfort and spurred by the sprouting seeds of their discontent the only logical next step is to try to find out “okay, well then what is to be done?”

            But you have to give a background lesson first if the book/site of it you send them doesn’t explain in the preface, the whole thing that in the context of her book “Social-democrat” meant socialists in general; both revolutionary and the Bernstien-type ‘voting in socialism through reform’ revisonists; because this was in like 1900, before the failure of the second international and resultant split of the communists. It’s only after all of that and the 3rd international and the betrayal of Rosa and the communist KPD by the reformists that that the “social democrats” came to be understood as we know them today, reformist welfare liberals (which, incidentally, thoroughly and undeniably vindicates Luxemburg, Lenin and the Bolsheviks, et al and their criticisms of reformism).

    • anarcho_blinkenist@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Marx has been blunted and made tame and by those who haven’t read him.

      You might say they have “Turned Marx Into A Common Liberal”

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Actually its prob like only one or two laser lines you can casually step over.

    But the are super sensitive & triggery.

    • MaeBorowski@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Communism allows everyone to pretend to have free stuff by declaring those that actually make it less than human

      I know you’ve been banned (not unreasonably so) and can’t respond, but if you truly believe what you wrote above, you owe it to yourself to find out how you’ve been lied to. Communism at its most fundamental core is about alleviating the exploitation done to “those that actually make it” (workers). Communism elevates everyone to personhood, as opposed to capitalism that only does so for the ownership class.

  • HowMany@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    All the “isms” and the “ocracys” are fine except for one small point… none of them work.

  • Thann@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    3 months ago

    You have a cabal of elites who say they are improving the lives of the working class while executing any workers who disagree with them