I think that’s the source of most of your problems, really. There isn’t really a coherent ideology that can be described in that manner, Marxists don’t believe the state can be reformed into Socialism and Social Democrats don’t think Socialism is necessary.
I feel like generally people here are pretty cool with most opinions but leans left significantly. There is still lemmy.ml, hexbear and lemmygrad that is very toxic and an echo chamber.
Pretty much every instance can be described as an “echo chamber.” Lemmy.world is right-leaning and is dominated by Liberals, for example. Hexbear is anti-sectarian, meaning Marxists and Anarchists are allowed, just not liberalism. As for toxicity, I find Hexbear to be one of the least toxic, especially when compared to Lemmy.world.
All in all, Lemmyis definitely going to continue to be predominantly leftists unless instances outright defederate from Marxists, like Lemmy.world does, hence the current right-wing leaning.
Hexbear is anti-sectarian, meaning Marxists and Anarchists are allowed, just not liberalism. As for toxicity, I find Hexbear to be one of the least toxic, especially when compared to Lemmy.world.
Gonna have to disagree with you there pretty heavily. Maybe there’s a different experience as an Anarchist vs a Marxist but, while I like conversing with a good number of Hexbears, I’ve found that the the instance is incredibly toxic with the cultivated “dunking” culture rewarding participating in insular, anti-social behavior for Internet clout and mods participating in sectarianism by disingenuously labeling non-ML leftist voices and critical historical analysis as fash.
I’ve found that the the instance is incredibly toxic with the cultivated “dunking” culture rewarding participating in insular, anti-social behavior for Internet clout and mods participating in sectarianism by disingenuously labeling non-ML leftist voices and critical historical analysis as fash.
Depends on what you consider leftist, I suppose. As a community, Hexbear isn’t toxic at all, just firmly anti-liberal. There isn’t really a culture around “dunking,” at least not in my experience.
If I want a struggle session, I go on Lemmy.ml, if I want to relax, Hexbear is more friendly. At least, that’s my personal experience, as a recovering debate-bro.
Perhaps there’s been some changes - that would make me extremely happy. I had generally good experiences initially but saw more and more attacking of users not from Hexbear or .ml instances, frequently over nothing but misunderstanding or miscommunication with no quarter or space for clearing up misunderstanding given even to other anticapitalists. It got to the point where I blocked the instance due to the negative impact on my own well-being that I noticed from the unnecessary strife and aggression that I saw and experienced. To be fair, some of it could be misperception and/or RSD on my part as one who is neurodivergent and frequently concerned about being misinterpreted or unintentionally phrasing something incorrectly.
At least, that’s my personal experience, as a recovering debate-bro.
That’s awesome. There are some great and chill comms there - maybe I might to reconsider the instance block and be more judicious in blocking only comms where I find problematic behavior. The only other instance that I have blocked is that sports one that was clogging up my feed with stuff that I find boring.
I’ve found that the the instance is incredibly toxic with the cultivated “dunking” culture rewarding participating in insular, anti-social behavior for Internet clout and mods participating in sectarianism by disingenuously labeling non-ML leftist voices and critical historical analysis as fash.
It might make contextual sense to browse it from Hexbear. There’s a ton of activity on it for the size of the userbase, and a lot of it is fun, comfy, and chill. The news threads are always more serious, and there is the dunk tank, but those are parts of a whole.
Four point on lemmy. I have some comments the between social dem and Marxism line though.
Well… I think public private partnerships are the way to go with profit sharing and workers being a part of the decision making process. I also think a lot of industries should be handled by the government or have a government company that is strictly non-profit. People should also have the choice of a free Internet connection if they don’t want to pay for high speeds and public transportation should be free and good. Social housing should be built in massive quantities and nimbyism should not outweigh the benefits of the people.
Taxing negative effects on people via pollution should be taxed out of existence. Natural resources should be state-owned and work for the benefit of the people. Compaign donations should be illegal and loopholes should be closed.
These are all policies that are Marxism inspired but they still keep the capitalist element and a market economy. I think a market economy can be good but really needs a firm hand to guide it so it doesn’t fuck everything up.
I believe that this area of policies should be explored more and instead of just saying “Marxism is best” then think about what an economy with 70%-90% collectively owned would look like.
Well… I think public private partnerships are the way to go with profit sharing and workers being a part of the decision making process. I also think a lot of industries should be handled by the government or have a government company that is strictly non-profit. People should also have the choice of a free Internet connection if they don’t want to pay for high speeds and public transportation should be free and good. Social housing should be built in massive quantities and nimbyism should not outweigh the benefits of the people.
This is what I am talking about, actually. You’re currently talking about what you want, without analysis of how to get there. That’s why Marxism is incompatible with Social Democracy. Marxists don’t believe you can simply vote that into existence in a system where Capitalists have.all of the power.
Taxing negative effects on people via pollution should be taxed out of existence. Natural resources should be state-owned and work for the benefit of the people. Compaign donations should be illegal and loopholes should be closed.
Lots of shoulds without discussing how to get there.
These are all policies that are Marxism inspired but they still keep the capitalist element and a market economy. I think a market economy can be good but really needs a firm hand to guide it so it doesn’t fuck everything up.
It’s not really Marxist inspired, though. It erases all analysis of Capitalism, all philosophical aspects, and all of the revolutionary aspects of it. Social safery nets are good, but that’s not necessarily borne from Marxism. Simply thinking a market economy can be good is already far off of Marxism.
I believe that this area of policies should be explored more and instead of just saying “Marxism is best” then think about what an economy with 70%-90% collectively owned would look like.
I think this is ultimately born from a lack of engagement with Marx’s works, really, though I could be wrong. What have you read from Marx?
I like the ideology of socialism where workers control the means of production but I think a revolution will always put the power in the hands of the few as a by-product. I agree with Marx on a lot of points, but I also disagree with him on others.
Rest assured that this is my own opinion and I seriously thought about it over a couple of years and came to my own conclusion. You can frame the conclusion simply as this:
Capitalism does a lot of bad, capitalism also does a lot of good (think cheaper food production and more investment into equipment for productivity). So there are two solutions. Remove capitalism or remove the bad. In my opinion removing capitalism is a surefire way to remove the bad but will also remove the good. Removing the bad from capitalism is a lot more complex and turns a sprint into a marathon but I think the end product will lead to a more equitable society that’s genuinely controlled by the people.
I like the ideology of socialism where workers control the means of production but I think a revolution will always put the power in the hands of the few as a by-product. I agree with Marx on a lot of points, but I also disagree with him on others.
Historically, Socialist revolutions have done dramatic shifts towards democratization of production.
Capitalism does a lot of bad, capitalism also does a lot of good (think cheaper food production and more investment into equipment for productivity). So there are two solutions. Remove capitalism or remove the bad. In my opinion removing capitalism is a surefire way to remove the bad but will also remove the good. Removing the bad from capitalism is a lot more complex and turns a sprint into a marathon but I think the end product will lead to a more equitable society that’s genuinely controlled by the people
Cheaper food production and investment into machinery is a core part of Marxism, achieved via central planning. Removing Capitalism doesn’t remove these aspects.
Secondly, you don’t mention at all how you will convince the ruling class to give you these concessions, it isn’t a marathon, it’s pushing a boulder up an infinite mountain.
Thirdly, you have not at all explained why Capitalism is more controlled by the people, the point of Capitalism is profit in the hands of the ones who hold the Capital. Democratically controlling production via Marxism makes far more sense.
It’s fine to have a personal opinion, but Marxists are going to have similar criticisms of your opinions.
I think that’s the source of most of your problems, really. There isn’t really a coherent ideology that can be described in that manner, Marxists don’t believe the state can be reformed into Socialism and Social Democrats don’t think Socialism is necessary.
Pretty much every instance can be described as an “echo chamber.” Lemmy.world is right-leaning and is dominated by Liberals, for example. Hexbear is anti-sectarian, meaning Marxists and Anarchists are allowed, just not liberalism. As for toxicity, I find Hexbear to be one of the least toxic, especially when compared to Lemmy.world.
All in all, Lemmyis definitely going to continue to be predominantly leftists unless instances outright defederate from Marxists, like Lemmy.world does, hence the current right-wing leaning.
Gonna have to disagree with you there pretty heavily. Maybe there’s a different experience as an Anarchist vs a Marxist but, while I like conversing with a good number of Hexbears, I’ve found that the the instance is incredibly toxic with the cultivated “dunking” culture rewarding participating in insular, anti-social behavior for Internet clout and mods participating in sectarianism by disingenuously labeling non-ML leftist voices and critical historical analysis as fash.
Depends on what you consider leftist, I suppose. As a community, Hexbear isn’t toxic at all, just firmly anti-liberal. There isn’t really a culture around “dunking,” at least not in my experience.
If I want a struggle session, I go on Lemmy.ml, if I want to relax, Hexbear is more friendly. At least, that’s my personal experience, as a recovering debate-bro.
Perhaps there’s been some changes - that would make me extremely happy. I had generally good experiences initially but saw more and more attacking of users not from Hexbear or .ml instances, frequently over nothing but misunderstanding or miscommunication with no quarter or space for clearing up misunderstanding given even to other anticapitalists. It got to the point where I blocked the instance due to the negative impact on my own well-being that I noticed from the unnecessary strife and aggression that I saw and experienced. To be fair, some of it could be misperception and/or RSD on my part as one who is neurodivergent and frequently concerned about being misinterpreted or unintentionally phrasing something incorrectly.
That’s awesome. There are some great and chill comms there - maybe I might to reconsider the instance block and be more judicious in blocking only comms where I find problematic behavior. The only other instance that I have blocked is that sports one that was clogging up my feed with stuff that I find boring.
It might make contextual sense to browse it from Hexbear. There’s a ton of activity on it for the size of the userbase, and a lot of it is fun, comfy, and chill. The news threads are always more serious, and there is the dunk tank, but those are parts of a whole.
Four point on lemmy. I have some comments the between social dem and Marxism line though.
Well… I think public private partnerships are the way to go with profit sharing and workers being a part of the decision making process. I also think a lot of industries should be handled by the government or have a government company that is strictly non-profit. People should also have the choice of a free Internet connection if they don’t want to pay for high speeds and public transportation should be free and good. Social housing should be built in massive quantities and nimbyism should not outweigh the benefits of the people.
Taxing negative effects on people via pollution should be taxed out of existence. Natural resources should be state-owned and work for the benefit of the people. Compaign donations should be illegal and loopholes should be closed.
These are all policies that are Marxism inspired but they still keep the capitalist element and a market economy. I think a market economy can be good but really needs a firm hand to guide it so it doesn’t fuck everything up.
I believe that this area of policies should be explored more and instead of just saying “Marxism is best” then think about what an economy with 70%-90% collectively owned would look like.
This is what I am talking about, actually. You’re currently talking about what you want, without analysis of how to get there. That’s why Marxism is incompatible with Social Democracy. Marxists don’t believe you can simply vote that into existence in a system where Capitalists have.all of the power.
Lots of shoulds without discussing how to get there.
It’s not really Marxist inspired, though. It erases all analysis of Capitalism, all philosophical aspects, and all of the revolutionary aspects of it. Social safery nets are good, but that’s not necessarily borne from Marxism. Simply thinking a market economy can be good is already far off of Marxism.
I think this is ultimately born from a lack of engagement with Marx’s works, really, though I could be wrong. What have you read from Marx?
I like the ideology of socialism where workers control the means of production but I think a revolution will always put the power in the hands of the few as a by-product. I agree with Marx on a lot of points, but I also disagree with him on others.
Rest assured that this is my own opinion and I seriously thought about it over a couple of years and came to my own conclusion. You can frame the conclusion simply as this:
Capitalism does a lot of bad, capitalism also does a lot of good (think cheaper food production and more investment into equipment for productivity). So there are two solutions. Remove capitalism or remove the bad. In my opinion removing capitalism is a surefire way to remove the bad but will also remove the good. Removing the bad from capitalism is a lot more complex and turns a sprint into a marathon but I think the end product will lead to a more equitable society that’s genuinely controlled by the people.
That’s my personal opinion.
Historically, Socialist revolutions have done dramatic shifts towards democratization of production.
Cheaper food production and investment into machinery is a core part of Marxism, achieved via central planning. Removing Capitalism doesn’t remove these aspects.
Secondly, you don’t mention at all how you will convince the ruling class to give you these concessions, it isn’t a marathon, it’s pushing a boulder up an infinite mountain.
Thirdly, you have not at all explained why Capitalism is more controlled by the people, the point of Capitalism is profit in the hands of the ones who hold the Capital. Democratically controlling production via Marxism makes far more sense.
It’s fine to have a personal opinion, but Marxists are going to have similar criticisms of your opinions.