this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
91 points (96.0% liked)

Leftism

2537 readers
20 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Real Capitalism Has Simply Never Been Tried

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

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

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

The Trumpshbull

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 2 points 1 year 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

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year 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 year ago

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

@leftism

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year 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 year 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 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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 1 points 1 year 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 -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 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.
[–] jlou@mastodon.social -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Proudhon referred to himself as a socialist in the 19th century sense. Most people don't have what Proudhon advocated in mind when they use the term, socialism, today. It is clearer to use a different word, and also helps the left avoid any unnecessary negative associations and connotations

@leftism

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're not gonna dodge the negative associations for long. The bourgeoisie, state bureaucracy, and their useful idiots will just call you a woke radical left postmodern cultural neomarxist anyways. If you're gonna get called a socialist anyways, might as well insist on using the word as it was meant to be used, rather than ceding it to be used as an insult.

You also ignored point #2

[–] jlou@mastodon.social -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Classical laborists and their intellectual descendants' case against capitalism boils down to the idea that the positive and negative results of production are the private property of the workers in the firm. When understood properly, the unique arguments they make are that we should abolish capitalism in the name of private property. The left should lean into this framing. It's hard to call private property supporters Marxists.

Socialism doesn't clearly evoke those examples to people

@leftism

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why do you keep doing that thing at the bottom of your posts?

[–] shuzuko@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think it's something to do with the fact that they're accessing a lemmy community from Mastodon.

Proudhon said that property is theft

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

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

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year 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?

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

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

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year 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 1 points 1 year ago

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.

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

That's literally Venezuela

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Communism is not socialism

[–] mildlyusedbrain@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year 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 -2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, communism is what anarchists think they will get

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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 4 points 1 year 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 -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 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.

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Social democracy is still considered under the umbrella term of socialism, but it's further right than most leftist ideologies.

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

I would strongly disagree with that.

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

None of those are socialism.

[–] MBM@lemmings.world 1 points 1 year 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)