this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
667 points (97.2% liked)

Leftism

2056 readers
108 users here now

Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!

Rules:

Posting Expectations:

Sister Communities:

!abolition@slrpnk.net !antiwork@lemmy.world !antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world !breadtube@lemmy.world !climate@slrpnk.net !fuckcars@lemmy.world !iwwunion@lemmy.ml !leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com !leftymusic@lemmy.world !privacy@lemmy.world !socialistra@midwest.social !solarpunk@slrpnk.net Solarpunk memes !therightcantmeme@midwest.social !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world !vuvuzelaiphone@lemmy.world !workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world !workreform@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 45 points 1 month ago (2 children)

She is based and so fucking true. We were lied to and we need to do something about it.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

she's great. I was a medium player in the Weird Twitter scene and she found it and loved it.

William Gibson followed me because Mara retweeted some dumb weird Twitter "joke" of mine

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Coooooooool

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jlou@mastodon.social 35 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Socialism vs capitalism is a false dichotomy. There are other alternatives like economic democracy or mutualism where all companies are democratic worker coops. There are other critics of capitalism besides Marx such as the classical laborists like Proudhon and their modern intellectual descendants like David Ellerman

@leftism

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Economic democracy is just an aspect of a healthy socialist society.

Mutualism is a type of socialism.

The false dichotomy is between Leninism and liberalism.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The false dichotomy is between Leninism and liberalism.

Wait, are you implying these are the same thing?

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

A dichotomy is where there are only two choices or extremes. By saying it's a false dichotomy you are pointing out there are other options. It doesn't necessarily mean the two options from before are the same.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

By saying it’s a false dichotomy you are pointing out there are other options.

Ah, was a bit confused, because I've never seen anyone doubt the alternatives of Fascism or Anarchism.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Mutualism is not socialism as it has been defined in the 20th century @leftism

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago (5 children)
  1. Proudhon referred to himself as a socialist.
  2. Revolutionary Catalonia, the Makhnovshina, and the MAREZ all existed in the 20th century. All of them had mutualist elements and called themselves socialist. The successors to the MAREZ, the CGALs, still exist and still consider themselves socialist.
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

or mutualism where all companies are democratic worker coops

I think that Karl Marx might have described that as the workers controlling the means of production. In fact I think he had a word for that...

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 1 month ago

Marx wouldn't have described an economy that uses markets as socialist

@leftism

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Real Capitalism Has Simply Never Been Tried

[–] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

That's what they keep telling me, but every step closer to free market capitalism we take seems to make things worse.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I'm very confused and I'm sure it's because I'm very ignorant of modern pop culture, but who is Matilda?

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117008/

The protagonist of a book that got adapted into a movie almost 30 years ago

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Thank you. I read the book when I was a kid, but I was 18 or 19 when that movie came out, so I'm not surprised I didn't realize she was the actress in it.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

She looks older in the picture too

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The fact that no one would ask this about Radcliffe/Harry Potter is exactly why this tweet of hers is hilarious

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The Faceless Old Woman Who Secretly Lives In Your Home is right.

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Wait, Matilda voices the Faceless Old Woman?? TIL

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

She does, yes.

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Communism is not socialism

[–] mildlyusedbrain@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Communism is a form of socialism. If you think socialism is a single ideology, then you've only read the spark notes for either.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, communism is what anarchists think they will get

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

The Trumpshbull

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Again, it boils down to "define socialism".

Are we talking about USSR, Cuba and China-type socialism? Then they are all those things.

But if we're talking about Finland, Denmark Sweden and Norway-socialism, then I'm on board with socialism!

[–] coldy@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The problem is that none of the countries you listed were ever socialist. Finland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway are just capitalist countries with good social policies.

And as much as their propagandists wish they did, the USSR, Cuba and China never got past the state capitalism part of establishing socialism.

There has never really been a socialist country in the world, it's a bit of a moot point to go like "I like this kind of socialism but not this kind" when nobody ever got to see it...

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That's my point. Socialism developed a broad meaning as time went on. Before, it started to mean simply demanding better worker's rights and conditions. But evolved to mean businesses owned by workers. Eventually, communism came into the scene and started to promote stateless society run by the proletariat. Then with so many people being turned off by the violence of communism, the more moderate left-- social democrats-- advocated to implement socialism through political and electoral mobilisation. But even then, as time progressed, social democrats abandoned their attempts to implement wholesale socialism and instead rein capitalism with sweeping regulations, instead of abolishing capitalism. Nonetheless, even though social democracy still embraced capitalism, the ideology is still considered under the wide tent of socialism but further right to it.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

IIRC communism was the original Das Kapital version, and socialism came into being as "communism-lite" not really following Marx's ideal but giving some good things to workers

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The term socialism was first coined in 1832, way before Das Kapital has been published in 1866. But before Karl Marx, socialism as we know it wasn't something that is fully solid despite the term already being coined. During 1848 liberal revolution, there were some who participated who'd be considered "socialists", but they don't necessarily know what they want.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago

That's really cool! Thanks for the context I hadn't known about that broader current of socialist thinking

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Define the Nordic Model. It’s not socialism what they have. At best it’s a social democracy. They still run on a capitalistic system. Not to mention they are crawling to the right.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MBM@lemmings.world 9 points 1 month ago

Using socialist to mean "has social policies" is weird to me (and some of the Nordics aren't in a great state government-wise right now)

[–] SSJMarx@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Are the Chinese antisemitic? I don't even think they qualify by Israel's stupid definition of the word, since they support the UN borders.

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Socialism has a broad definition than antisemitism. Does it mean worker-run businesses? Businesses run by the government on behalf of workers? Or should society be organised by commune?

Anti-semitism is anti-semitism. Nevermind what Hasbara says and the Israeli state weaponising the term to their convenience, anti-semitism just means being bigoted against Jews.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] SSJMarx@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Some Chinese people believe in antisemitic tropes that Jews secretly rule the world.

So because some Chinese citizens believe conspiracy theories, you claim that the government itself is antisemitic? That's the weakest anti-China bash I've ever seen, dude.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Please quote me making that claim.

[–] SSJMarx@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

me: Are the Chinese antisemitic?

you: Yes

it was clear from the context that I wasn't talking about individuals who happen to be chinese, but the socialist chinese government

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It was not clear to me. Do you think it's possible that not everything you say is universally understood by everyone to be what you mean to say?

You know, sort of like how it wasn't clear to you that I never said anything about the government?

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

None of those are socialism.

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's literally Venezuela

load more comments
view more: next ›