NSFW for: Potentially challanging your narrative and worldview.
I recently found this article summarising important findings.
Breaking out of ones own bubble is important. And I would like you to remember this the next time you are at a ballot.
If you really think of the children, vote according to reality.
And if you FEEL personally attacked by this article and bash me in the comments, whataboutism away from the subject or bothsides-ing the issue; Thanks for making my point for me and seek help.
Dude, I’m sorry, but this just demonstrates a bizarre misunderstanding of the left and right spectrum, and a complete misunderstanding of communism.
The left-right dichotomy most certainly represents opposition or favour toward liberal capitalist democratic states. Here’s a rough outline.
Where on Earth did you hear that communists want to redistribute all wealth through a 100% tax? Seriously, wtf is that all about?
Communists want workers to control their work and work their own way without a boss taking all the profit.
deleted by creator
No, we just won’t get anywhere until we get past the foundations.
I don’t believe in horseshoe theory and it still makes sense. Why shouldn’t this make sense?
This sounds like gibberish.
Yes, this is true. Capitalism, and liberalism (later neo-liberalism) inevitably leads to fascism.
Because everyone owns these things communally. There is no private property, and thus no need for money. There is also no state, so no need for a separated governmental apparatus. The people rule themselves on equal footing, with no class distinctions. And all is made and shared on the principle of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need”.
You need to move past the cold war propaganda that told you communism means big government. Communism means no government.
Nah, Im good. I dont talk to people who show zero candor. Ive said a lot, and if you cant follow then-- tsk!
Answer at least the police use of force issue and if its good Ill probably reply. “Is it good that the State has a monopoly on force?”
Zero candor? Lmao I’ve told you what I thought, haven’t I? I’ve made my points. You don’t understand the left right distinction. That’s what we’re talking about. Your unhinged theories with zero relevance to reality don’t really mean much since they rest on faulty assumptions.
Why are you asking such obvious questions? No, of course it isn’t fucking good. I’m a communist, is this not obvious by now?
It was always obvious, lol. Just trying to get you out the closet, sheesh. Lemmy is hilariously more Commie than Reddit, somehow. You’re pretending to be a radical enlightened centrist, who dont really actually exist. Stop it :p
I dont think you’ve made points, tbh. You showed me a .png, deflected moral questions, and deferred to current state power whenever possible. But we’re getting a lil candor now ;]
If right wing means ‘ultra capitalistic’, and capitalists dont like paying taxes, would it not be fair to assume that right-systems favor low taxes… Can you fund an excessive, wasteful, state on low taxes? Can you fund sweeping tyranny? This is just syllogistic reasoning. Its not some slippery academic nonsense. Im not appealed by authority.
You can say a Commie totally-not-a-state doesnt use money, man. But it will still exist in a world that does. Scarcity will always exist. And thus markets/economies will always exist. Even if they’re black (aka the real free market, lol).
What are you talking about? I haven’t pretended anything, certainly not that.
I’ve made two, which I’ve continued to elaborate on:
Hey! I spent time making that! It roughly describes the left right spectrum. You barely even commented on it.
I’ve answered your questions dude… Wtf are you talking about?
Um, wtf are you talking about? I keep criticisng state power… Are you trolling me?
Yes, and they do. On the rich, anyway.
I’m not the one saying they actually want low taxes. They just want low taxes for the rich, by using either flat tax or very minor progressive taxing.
Why say “totally-not-a-state”? Now you’re the one deferring to state power by assuming it’s necessary. And why should it use money if all goods are freely available?
A world that does what? Use money? Well, if we’re for some reason assuming this end-stage communism has been reached without a global revolution, then methods can be set up for external trade, assuming this hypothetical communist society hasn’t been embargoed by the world for daring to try communism, like has happened to Cuba.
Or invaded, like Vietnam, Argentina, Chile, etc…
Who ever said it didn’t? But we already possess the capability to feed the world and still have some left over. The issue isn’t scarcity, it’s economics.
Economies maybe, but markets aren’t inevitable. They haven’t always existed.
If you’re gonna appeal to the black market as some sort of ideal free market for the world market to aspire to, then I worry that I’ve been taking you far too seriously.
Im actually pleased if you did produce the .png yourself :] Barely commented on it? Ive flipped it over because it DOES describe taxation if you assume (correctly) that UltraCapitalists dont like paying taxes and dont want their companies to go public-sector. Im merely reframing your view by making inferences. Simple assumptions.
You DID deflect questions. Theres some you missed still, but its cool. We’ve had a lot to say. I dont think your a robot (anymore) :] Im on mobile, so forgive me if I dont hit all your comments, too. Also we really should condense to one reply thread. Been here before, makes things easier. Im gon try to wait until you reply to my last to make it happen.
I am a Libertarian, not an anarchist. I like the idea of a State. They just also happen to suck in practice. Im giving you hell about Communism but I have criticisms of ‘Neo-Libralism’ and cuckservatives. For instance, if our nation has open borders then how do I still have property rights if Uncle Sam cannot establish their own rights to property! How can I enjoy my (positive) liberty when the dollar is failing to poor economic planning?! And so on. Technically this will make me a statist, sure. But given the need to redistribute, AnComns are just a larp. AnCaps almost make sense, but its squirrely.
I agree foreign intervention is fucked up and beyond the scope of what our nation was intended to achieve. Retaliation? Maybe, but only if Congress approves and the budget isnt skyhigh. However I go even farther. US founders specifically warned of ‘estranged and entangling foreign relations.’ This is describing UN/NATO and so on. Im against those sorts of councils.
I would like to hear YOU (not wikipedia) explain the difference between markets and economies. I suspect all you’ll come up with is scale…
We have the ability to feed the world on paper. Heres how you can tell its BS though… We havent worked out water yet. Water is virtually imparishable, comes in 1 flavor, is needed everyday, cannot be deformed, can be transported by static pipes… But its not done. Imagine how much harder of a problem food is than water. Its incalcuably more difficult.
Awful things happen in the black market. Human trafficking and hitmen and so on. However it is infact a free market. Most critiques of capitalism come post-robber barron. When the FED was formed. Then blew our load fighting for Europe whoch tanked our finances. So we switched to fiat to fund endless wars and dick with other free peoples. And everyone lives in debt to the banks named after the same robber barrons now. Charming. I would suggest you and I probably never saw a free market.
For instance: Opening a gas station. Gas prices are set by OPEC. US agencies tell you the tax rates, they tell you all the expensive standards they want you to achieve. Then across the street another gas staion opens up. If you charge way more than him, its ‘price gouging.’ Way less, ‘predatory prices.’ The same?! ‘Price collusion.’ Gas stations net profit in selling chips than gas. “Free market.”
Most ironically, the practice of making gouging/collusion/predatory tactics unlawful is to prevent monopoly. Meanwhile, the oligarchs openly lobby the government.
Not just scale, but category. Economy describes the entire flow of goods around a given area. Market is a specific way to distribute goods, that is predicated on competition between sellers to sell goods to consumers. Economies don’t necessarily have to be market economies.
Because of capitalism. The infrastructure is already there to freely give water to entire nations. But certain people would lose out on money if it were nationalised… and those people have lots of money to lobby with.
LOL no. Socialism has been a movement since capitalism began, dude.
Seems pretty free right now. Ask Jeff Bezes and Elon Musk. They’re living pretty free.
I’m not sure why you’re not a socialist if you see the problems inherent in capitalism. The core difference between the two is that capitalism is set up to enrich owners of a business, and socialism is set up to enrich the workers. I’m honestly asking, why do you object to that?
I accidentally deleted my own comment :,]
Communism and fascism look almost indistinguishable when compared to minarchism. The ONLY way for that to be true is to ascribe to ‘horseshoe theory.’ I don’t. I think the game theory IS the Occam’s Razor: A small govt can only inflict small tyranny, and reciprocally.
Benito said that “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.” I believe this describes our so-called Neo-Libralism strikingly well… The US government is a rouge agent. They spy on us, they fight unconstitutional wars, they allow monopoly, they engage in obvious nepotism. The corruption is so deep its almost impossible to even begin. And its all funded by average joes tryna live a little life for themselves.
If I make [labor], how does it become the peoples’ [labor]? It gets redistributed. If you dont earn fiat but get to keep your [widget] and government redistributes your [widget] then you have ostensibly been taxed at n%. Where you are one person and the people are many, therefore n% is presumably quite high.
In literally no universe is this true. Fascism has an all-encompassing state with all power vested in an individual; communism has no state and all power distributed among all the people
Like I said, we can get nowhere before you understand these basic things
You say Im propagandized :33 Both require Government+Corporate collusion. Oh, excuse me, in the new-speak, Community+MeansofProduction.
Show me a stateless Communism. However, we really should condense replies so we dont get out of whack.
This is pure fantasy. If there’s any ideology more opposed to corporate power, it’s communism. Do you even know what communism is? Please, give me a real answer.
“New-speak”? Workers seizing the means of production is literally in the Communist Manifesto. This isn’t some hiding of a real agenda or a new addition. Why are you so ignorant to the theory of the ideology you spend so much effort “critiquing”?
Please, tell me what is so absurd to you about the idea of workers democratically managing an organisation together. Tell me what is so absurd about the people democratically managing production as a whole together. Why does this sound so oppressive to you? Why does this speak to you of state power, or of corporations?
The state spends so much effort suppressing people when they try to organise. The state hates this. This is a threat to the state. The same is true of corporate power. When workers unionise, corporations panic and beg the state to intervene. The state has intervened and sent in armed police to gun down union organisers, and that’s ignoring the times corporations have sent private goon squads to put down native workers in foreign countries.
State and corporate power are against communism. Why do you think the US has invaded so many countries that have attempted it, to put it down and halt it in its tracks?
I’m sorry, but for the reasons stated above it’s pretty impossible to do that. But it has existed in pockets, such as revolutionary Catalonia.