• Sotuanduso@lemm.eeEnglish
    8·
    2 hours ago

    I’ve been blocking political communities, so I don’t get so much of this. I would recommend you also block communities that annoy you. We’re in the same boat of browsing by top X hours.

    Solarpunk doesn’t really bug me though because it’s (supposed to be) more about the good that could be rather than complaining about what is. (Don’t get me wrong, complaints can be valid, but that’s not what I come to Lemmy for.)

    • NateNate60@lemmy.worldOP
      26·
      4 hours ago

      I want to seize the means of production as much as the next guy but it gets kinda boring after a while if that’s the only content available

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        9·
        3 hours ago

        Sometimes there are cats! That’s always fun! Some of those cats want socialism too, but they’re still cats!

      • eskimofry@lemmy.world
        9·
        3 hours ago

        It doesnt get boring hearing about how judges demolish bodily autonomy of women and commit other atrocities in the name of corporate freedom.

      • Soup@lemmy.cafeEnglish
        2·
        1 hour ago

        They claim both sides are equally as bad while ignoring the fact that their side has never even been tested. Therefore they have no fucking clue that they wouldn’t be worse.

        Shill Stein has already been outed, West is an incompetent blowhard and only shows up ever four years to suggest impractical and irrelevant nonsense,

        And JFK….

        The Green Party is essential a giant spoiler campaign.

          • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
            3·
            2 hours ago

            Accuracy of your definition aside, you should realize that they’re not the ones cheering for World War 3, it’s the people who want to invade Iran who are doing that.

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              3·
              2 hours ago

              Hong Kong, Taiwan, Tibet, the Phillippines, Crimea, and Ukraine (just to name some ongoing conflicts)

              But sure, its all the west with their “mutual defence pacts” and their “incentivizing diplomacy through trade”, Those beligerent bastards.

              Also, though, whataboutism in the face of their dogshit ideology.

              • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
                2·
                1 hour ago

                Hong Kong, Taiwan, Tibet, the Phillippines, Crimea, and Ukraine

                What world do you live in? Hong Kong had some protests four years ago, Taiwan has never had anything happen and nothing appears to be about to happen, Tibet is a conflict that was resolved seventy years ago, and The Phillipines is some boats ramming each other (which isn’t good don’t get me wrong, but it’s hardly a military conflict). You might as well say that Atlanta is an ongoing conflict because it’s still occupied by the Union!

                Crimea/Ukraine is the only thing that’s a military conflict that you mentioned, and the people actively escalating it and sabotaging peace talks with regards to it are the western countries.

            • Soup@lemmy.cafeEnglish
              1·
              1 hour ago

              I don’t think you’ll find too many bOtH siDEs accelerationists among the liberals, but don’t let this get in the way of some good ol’ fashioned uninformed ignorance!

              • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
                2·
                54 minutes ago

                The both sides people are accurately pointing out that both sides of the American monoparty are equally accelerationist in terms of their foreign policy. They are both pro genocide, they both want to saber rattle at America’s perceived enemies, they can both potentially start world war 3 - and we’re against that happening.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      3·
      2 hours ago

      socialism itself is just, kinda weird. From a philosophical perspective it makes sense and has clear distinctions. But from a practical view it’s just sort of. Capitalism but if it was more confusing for some reason. If you go too far into one direction, it’s just communism, and that’s not socialism, obviously. The other direction and it’s literally just capitalism, so it has to sit in this weird space between where you can’t engage with the best parts of capitalism (or it just weirdly handicaps parts of capitalism) and communism.

      and then of course you’ve got people (probably grifters) like hasan piker who claim to be socialist while having millions of dollars, but doing literally nothing with it, because investing it wouldn’t be socialist, and you can’t really just give it away, because well, it’s a lot of money. I mean you could, but it’s also just, sort of redundant at that point.

      Realistically he should be investing that money into a lot of different things, increasing returns on revenues, and creating a content creator collective or something silly like that, but to my knowledge he hasn’t probably because he’s either stupid or lazy. I don’t blame him for either of those things though.

      socialism, particularly modern western socialism that’s based on capital needs a fundamental proof of concept work-through before we can really do anything with it, i think.

      Capitalism, while it has problems, it at least makes sense on a fundamental human perspective. I own things, you own things, we own things, that also applies to capital as well. It’s so fundamentally tied to the human experience and history that it’s just sort of hard to deviate from. Even china does a lot of capitalism.

      man that was much longer than i anticipated. Apologies in retrospective lol.

      Anyway for the second part of the admittedly very old and dead joke by this point in the post. It’s a meme about socialism on the internet. (particularly a farther left space on the internet)

      • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
        5·
        2 hours ago

        The confusion stems from the fact that you seem not to know what you’re talking about. Like at all.

        If you go too far into one direction, it’s just communism

        This is a misunderstanding so fundamental that it’s a completely beaten dead horse of a joke.

        • Soup@lemmy.cafeEnglish
          2·
          1 hour ago

          It makes perfect sense if you understand how nuance works. But I think there is where the problem lies- YOUR confusion stems from your inability to understand it.

          • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
            2·
            1 hour ago

            It makes perfect sense if you understand how nuance works.

            Saying “if you do too much socialism, it’s communism” is exactly the opposite of a nuanced understanding. Please read a pamphlet.

            • Soup@lemmy.cafeEnglish
              1·
              1 hour ago

              They’re not wrong. And I’m not going to apologise for not feeling like explaining it to you, but I’ll advise that you start by learning what nuance actually means.

              • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
                3·
                55 minutes ago

                This is one of the most inane threads I’ve ever seen on Lemmy. Nuance is having a fine understanding of a topic, while the line I’m quoting is taking a complicated topic and boiling it down to a truism. It’s the most obvious and classic form of anti-intellectualism and it certainly does not reflect a nuanced understanding of socialism or communism.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          2·
          2 hours ago

          i’ve seen socialism defined as anything from early USSR under lenin, to capitalism but if private ownership of capital isn’t a thing anymore.

          It’s incredibly broad depending on how you want to apply it. And technically, communism is actually a subset of socialism.

          Capitalism is likewise pretty broad as well, but generally the ownership of capital is traceable and has some form of root ownership. Even things like stocks still have clearly defined ownership. Loans are weird, but the ownership there is clearly defined.

          Under socialism loans may not even be possible, depending on how aggressive with it you are. Unless you lent to a third party, like a separate state/country i guess.

          IDK what definition you’re working with here, but there isn’t much flexibility allowing you very much room to differentiate it here. I’m really not sure how you’re going to work out of this one to be honest.

          Like philosophically, socialism is theoretically simple. it’s the implementation that’s hard. The idea is pretty simple, it’s the concept that there is no singular ownership, but collective ownership. You could define this as something like “anybody who has any investment in any product/good or service has ownership” but this gets sort of confusing. If i buy product from the goods company, does that mean i now own a “share” of the goods company? If i can, does this mean buying literal shares of the company would be “negative” shares? Or is this backwards, buying product produces a negative share, while investing provides a positive share. Does this influence the “shares” of the employees of the company? Are these the same shares? Can i simply out own the shares of any employee with (literal) capital? Or is buying product not applicable in this scenario. That seems reasonable to me, so we’ll omit that.

          Where does currency even come from? The government? The global trade market? Who owns that? Since the money is in my possession, and it’s doing work for me, i must own it, at least partially, but it’s also capable of doing work for others, so do other people also own a part of the capital that i hold? That would be weird so let’s simply ascribe capital as a means of temporarily holding “schizo” capital.

          so now we have a socialist society, that has private capital, and relatively isolated businesses. The employees own a share of the business. We still havent determined how that’s proportioned. But we can assume they do, so we have a relatively capitalist market, as that’s generally how a market is going to work most effectively (also that would literally just be communism at that point), unless you are either god, or the worlds most powerful supercomputer that can simply predict the needs of a market at a whim. Or you just allow no flexibility in the market (surely this won’t cause problems) with companies that don’t have direct ownership, which is not dissimilar to how the silicon valley works, minus the VC funding.

          So we’ve basically just created capitalism, but different. Not that this is a bad thing. It’s just, an odd problem.

          At the end of the day, it’s either going to approach communism, or capitalism, there is no distinct mechanism of socialism. I generally refer to this as an “approaching zero problem” as it has no clear definition, and if you go far enough you’re just going to end up back where you started, one way or the other.

          • SSJMarx@lemm.eeEnglish
            2·
            28 minutes ago

            So I guess the problem is that socialism and communism are kinda used in two different ways. One way refers to a political program, the other refers to a hypothetical stage of economic development.

            The political programs are more clearly defined. Socialism is an umbrella term for a lot of specific anticapitalist political programs, of which one calls itself Communism. Communism is for people who like the Soviet Union and China, but there’s basically no smoke in that ideology in western countries, where Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism are your biggest left wing contenders.

            But “socialism” and “communism” as stages of economic development are moving targets, impossible to pin down because they’re entirely hypothetical and there are only a couple countries that have even tried to achieve them. Was the Soviet Union communist? Well, it was lead by Communists in the political program sense, but I don’t think anyone would argue that it achieved communism in the economic and social development sense. Modern day China, too, is Communist in the political sense, but even by their own metrics they are still capitalist, and see socialism as a goal they are working towards (if you believe their rhetoric and don’t think it’s all just cynical, which many western socialists do).

            So while the Chinese Communists have their own definition of practical socialism, western leftists are not in power and all of our ideas remain purely theoretical as a result. Add to this the fact that there is no major leftist political org in western countries for the socialists to rally around and you get more definitions of socialism and communism (the stages of economic development) than you can shake a stick at. This leads to the problem you’re describing, where socialism appears to have no solid meaning at all, because the notion of it is so phantasmal.

            But I don’t think that you can dismiss socialism or its results as “capitalism, but different,” because the whole thing about socialism is that new power structures create new incentive structures and therefore even if there are some superficial elements of capitalism that remain - like the use of currency - under a socialist regime the outcomes should be more equal, fair, and democratic. There are numerous historical examples of these better alternative outcomes, but of course they’ve all been relentlessly propagandized against in Western countries so that the average person doesn’t realize that there is a better way to run society than the one they were born into.

    • Soup@lemmy.cafeEnglish
      1·
      2 hours ago

      Nine times out of ten it’s incorrectly defined by idealists that haven’t figured out that a fair amount of American sociological and economic standards are already steeped in socialist services, and the rest of the rhetoric that defines socialism would absolutely fail if attempted in America.

      In short, nine times out of ten, a socialist has absolutely no fucking idea what they’re talking about, but just parroting smug bullshit that they think makes them look edgy and educated.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      9·
      3 hours ago

      I just browse the feed by top x hours and I see so much of it. Also buttholes.

      Be cool if we had more communities like Superbowl

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      2·
      2 hours ago

      in my defense, politics brings out the stupid in everyone, and i love that.

      It’s not my fault people aren’t spending time over arguing about whether some stupid is game is better than some other stupid game. Do better.

      /s (sort of)

    • remotelove@lemmy.ca
      4·
      2 hours ago

      Then there is ml and lemmygrad. They lean on something, I know that at least.

      New users accidentally posting on those instances is kinda fun to watch, TBH. It’s like Lemmy’s version of hazing I suppose.

  • CTDummy@lemm.ee
    1·
    2 hours ago

    Blocking hexbear and lemmy.ml no joke removes 95% of shitposting and socialism/communism spamming. Should be done by default. Just block any overly political sub tbh.

      • CTDummy@lemm.ee
        2·
        2 hours ago

        And people like you is why I advocate muting those comms. The odd person like you is still easier to block. Those subs and their communities, evidently, fail to grasp the concept of “disagreeing” or simply not wanting incendiary political discourse in their feed daily.

  • qooqie@lemmy.world
    34·
    6 hours ago

    I realize we’re inherently not capitalistic platform because everyone has the access to own their portion. Pretty cool imo and not to toot the horn for the millionth time, it definitely seems like the future of the internet

  • Rookwood@lemmy.world
    13·
    6 hours ago

    Not sure what you’re talking about. Since the summer it’s just been post about Dems and how Republicans are weirdos. Honestly, the socialist presence on Lemmy is lacking.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      8·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah, I see lots of bitching about there being (gasp) communists on a platform that was built by communists.

    • Southern Boy@lemmy.ml
      5·
      4 hours ago

      Democrats are quite convinced they are the most radical and pragmatic political force on earth, being reluctant followers of Placeholder Hitler pitted against More Racist Hitler in the general election (the only election in 𝕌𝕊𝕠𝕟𝕚𝕒 and therefore the only legitimate election on the American continents, Canadia is a 𝕌𝕊𝕠𝕟𝕚𝕒𝕟 state no further questions thank you, thank you). It’s a shame they are all legally required to vote for a Hitler, but the law says for everyone who doesn’t vote for a Hitler they will throw an undocumented child into a fetid ravine where a half-dead river struggles to flow leaving them for the coyotes.

      • argv minus one@mastodon.sdf.org
        1·
        2 hours ago

        I don’t remember Harris openly advocating ethnic cleansing. If you’re going to say she’s equivalent to Hitler, I expect you to bring receipts.

        • Southern Boy@lemmy.ml
          2·
          2 hours ago

          She is literally a rebrand of Biden, would you call what is happening in Palestine and Lebanon ethnic cleansing? I don’t feel like debating nonexistent changes to the same political platform of lebensraum

          • argv minus one@mastodon.sdf.org
            1·
            2 hours ago

            I would call what’s happening in Palestine beyond Biden’s meaningful control.

            He can cease arms shipments to Israel, but not without losing the election by angering the Jewish voters, and then Trump will nuke Gaza and build one of his high-rises on the rubble. That would solve nothing.

            Take it up with Netanyahu and his Israeli supporters. They’re the ones who decided to bomb the hell out of Gaza, not Biden.

            BTW, Lebensraum involved taking people’s houses, not blowing them up.

            • Southern Boy@lemmy.ml
              2·
              1 hour ago

              That got me winded since I’m on my phone, I forgot to mention the nuke thing. What is stopping Israel from nuking Palestine is a trifecta of linked issues

              • expending its deterrence versus Iran

              • counterattack which could flatten Israel is possible without nukes, and has been saved up already (this is not a joke)

              • counterattacks against US oil interests in the region

              It’s not about the unlimited might of the US being held back by goodwill. There are very real limitations, the Pentagon planned on doing what it’s being forced to do with Iran to China. Plans are scaling down all the time.

              By the way the 170,000 pounds figure was from what they dropped on a single city block.

            • Southern Boy@lemmy.ml
              2·
              2 hours ago

              Dude your worldview is completely based on news headlines and dem memes I don’t have time for this. Consider this a brief overview of stuff to consider and maybe redirect your energy to something better than saving the reputation of the dems, which they certainly will not help you with.

              The talking point that Trump is more Hitlerian due to being a threat to the institutions of bourgeois democracy is more credible than the “harm reduction to domestic minorities and global south countries”, but fortunately most people aren’t goofy enough to think that it matters if yet another president oversteps legal boundaries. Fascists rising only had to get rid of bourgeois democracy because power was not secure. Zero institutions in US democracy hinder fascists. The democrats refuse to undo conservative power grabs out of false pragmatism as they already got what they wanted, power within the system over their lessers. Like you view me, like a rube who needs a scolding.

              Biden’s branding of Reluctant Hitler has been slapped on the most lenience Israel has ever been given. Harris has also been clear that nobody will stop Israel from dropping 170,000 pounds (multiple Hiroshimas) of US bombs on Palestine and Lebanon.

              Biden has been even more extreme on border issues than Trump 1, and Trump 2 will be even more extreme than Biden.

              They are both worse than Hitler in their own way because they run a well-oiled empire not a cannibalistic aberration. Our cannibalism of Europe is financial, not via real land grabs.

              Please consider how much more there is to our lives than the general election. This is an opportunity to talk to people about what is being omitted from both party’s platforms.

              Anyways Jill Stein for the general or fuck you find me a candidate that isn’t Hitler.

              • argv minus one@mastodon.sdf.org
                1·
                1 hour ago

                I’m sure that Gish gallop would make Vance proud, but you’ll have to do better than that if you want to fool me.

                You’ll also need another account, because that one is blocked. Good day.