• Andy@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s a leftist. You’re a leftist, buddy.

    I relate a bit, though. I think it’s cringe when socialists call each other “comrade”.

    • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      4 months ago

      Is a communist the same as a progressive? A democratic socialist the same as an anarchist? Call me what you want but like I said, it’s reductive and meaningless.

      • Deceptichum@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        Progressives aren’t a thing, it’s simply an Amaerica counter label to conservatives so they have something to attack.

        And as an anarchist, I’ve no problem being lumped in with like minded views.

        We’re leftists and proud of it.

          • Deceptichum@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Yes. It’s an American term used to describe those who are in opposition to conservative views. It’s not an ideology.

            But please, tell me what being a progressive values compared to any other leftist. What makes a progressive different from a anarchist, communist, or a dem soc who have defined values and beliefs?

              • Deceptichum@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                That’s so vague that a conservative could call themselves progressive because they think it’s saving lives to ban abortion.

                  • Deceptichum@quokk.au
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    Anarchism wouldn’t piss on me if I’m on fire? Doubt.

                    I’m a hardcore burn the state down and send the rulers to the gallows if they resist leftist.

                    “Progressive” is not a system of beliefs, it’s not an ideology, it’s a term Americans used to describe differentiate from their conservatives because they can’t just use the label “leftist” because surprise surprise most of them are filthy capos.

              • Deceptichum@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                What, progressives are in favour of state owned utils or aren’t? Explain yourself properly.

                  • Deceptichum@quokk.au
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    This isn’t about clever sementics, it’s about them not being able to define what something is.

                    Progressive isn’t an ideology, you can’t lump it in with leftist ideals because it doesn’t stand for anything.

                • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  What makes a progressive different from a anarchist, communist, or a dem soc who have defined values and beliefs?

                  State ownership of utilities for one.

                  • Deceptichum@quokk.au
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Yes and what about it?

                    Socialists would be in favour of state ownership of resources.

                    Anarchists and communists wouldn’t be in favour of a state.

                    What do progressives value about state ownership of utils, are they for it, against it?

                  • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Communists believe in state ownership of utilities as well as many other things atleast until the state withers away

        • deafboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Communism is a conservative authoritarian dogma. The exact opossite of progress… or anarchy.

            • deafboy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              “In Marxist philosophy, the dictatorship of the proletariat is a condition in which the proletariat, or working class, holds control over state power. The dictatorship of the proletariat is the transitional phase from a capitalist and a communist economy…”

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat

              Except, there’s no such thing as a communist economy, so the transitional phase lasts as long as there’s capital to reallocate. Then peoole start to flee across the barbed wire and the facade falls down.

              • Strawberry
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                The statement “communism is a conservative authoritarian dogma” being backed up by referencing the idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is… definitely something

              • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                there is no such thing as a communist economy

                Can you back this claim up? Market economy is a term for a reason. An economy doesn’t have to be market to be an economy. Have you never heard of a planned economy?

                the transitional phase lasts as long as there’s capital to relocate

                No. The transitional phase lasts as long there is classes that necessitate a state.

                You have a very simplistic understanding of marxism that cannot be rectified through a fucking wikipedia search. Read the source material or stfu

                • deafboy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I could read the lifework of Marx, but it wouldn’t change the unviability of planned economy. My parents and grandparents lived in one.

                  If we ever stumble upon some kind of mathematical or technological miracle, able to predict the future, I’d be worth to try again. Until then, socialism is a dangerous cult.

                  • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    “Despite knowing nothing about this economic system I am convinced of its failure due to a single anecdotal experience where it did fail”

                    Have you even bothered to look at why it failed?

          • Deceptichum@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            You’re thinking of ML tankies.

            Communism is a stateless, classless, system where people enact mutualism and socialism without state coercion.

            • Hugucinogens
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              What makes this thing you’re describing, not anarchism?

              I think you’re thinking of anarchocommunism specifically. Which is “not all communism”™.

              State-based communism is a thing, that many people usually called tankies by others, do believe in.

              • Deceptichum@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                The difference between non-ML tankie communism and anarchism is the means of getting there.

                Communists want a vanguard state to slowly whittle away.

                Anarchists want to skip that step.

                • Hugucinogens
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I see. Well, if I take what you’re saying as fully correct, then it sounds like communism compared to anarchism, is just “a different path for how we reach the same utopia”.

                  And this different path passes through more authority (quantity and quality), through the existence and emphasis of the state.

                  How much authority, is probably what makes the spectrum of Anarchy to Stalin-Lenin.

                  And well… As an anarchist, deafboy’s comment might be polemic, but I get it. Any authority that can, will get corrupted.

      • Andy@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why must we divide the tribe? I don’t know how leftist who can’t identify as such plans to exercise collective power. But you do you.

    • PyroNeurosis
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Eh, it adds variety. I’d grow rather bored of addressing everyone as “friend”, “buddy”, etc.