▲ 624 ▼ Silicon Valley Is Panicking About Zohran Mamdani. NYC’s Tech Scene Is Not (www.wired.com) submitted 1 year ago by yonderbarn@lazysoci.al to c/technology@lemmy.world 105 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 110 points 1 year ago (8 children) The real battle isn't left or right. It's up vs down. Tax wealth not work! permalink fedilink source hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] black_flag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 year ago (2 children) I mean sort of but there are a lot of down folks on the side of the ups and that basically just brings us back to what left vs right always was permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is why more efforts should be spent on helping everyone see that billionaires are the real source of the problem. The rights handbook is just to say the leftist billionaires are the problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago And there is like 2, but they aren't really on the left, but center right. Every other that labels them as a democratic billion is more right than thst permalink fedilink source parent [–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (4 children) sort of, except the right usually (fucking always) fights to protect the rich. while the left (no Democrats don't fucking count) fight for equality and improving everyone's lives. so it is a left v right, you just renamed the categories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago (2 children) While that truism might annoy lovers of !politicalcompassmemes@lemmy.world it isn’t invalid, historically-speaking. Tell me more…From their first use in 1789 (long-short: seating positions) the definitions for left and right were fluid, but generally referred to “change” versus “status quo.” In Stalin’s era, left referred mostly to pro-worker policies, the economic change of the communist revolution. That convention was solidified in the US during the red scare, where left-wing came to mean “commie heresy.” After that period, the definition was gradually blurred again, perhaps by conservatives carrying forth the McCarthyist tradition of lumping any non-conformist view into “commie heresy.” Regardless, the resulting confusion in public political discourse is the reason Wayne Brittenden made the Political Compass website in 2001. By canonizing the economic-policy definition used by the Bolsheviks/McCarthyists as an actual X-axis spectrum, and the social-policy definitions of most other contexts as a Y-axis spectrum, one could easily map both dimensions as a cartesian coordinate. Quite handy. Still, as elegant and illuminating as that solution is, it remains a convention. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) tbf. those terms have evolved a lot since the French Revolution coined them. and given how fluid they are, in some conversations they might mean pure culture war issues like "THERE'S A TRANS FLAG IN COMIC BOOK MOVIE!!!!". but we can agree that in the bigger picture, left v right is about a top v bottom in power structures. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago Lol true. In fact, I guess always true for any historical use. At least, insofar as established power wants to keep playing the same game and under dog wants to play a different one. Shrug permalink fedilink source parent [–] uhdeuidheuidhed@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 year ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect The ratchet effect is a concept in sociology and economics illustrating the difficulty with reversing a course of action once a specific thing has occurred, analogous with the mechanical ratchet that allows movement in one direction and seizes or tightens in the opposite. Republicans push us in one direction, weak/complacent democrats don't fight back. It's part of the two-pronged strategy, and why anyone who supports establishment democrats is tacitly supporting republican policies. We really needed Bernie in 2016, but it shows where liberals' priorities lie. They become conservative as soon as their wealth is threatened. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] black_flag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 year ago (2 children) I mean sort of but there are a lot of down folks on the side of the ups and that basically just brings us back to what left vs right always was permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is why more efforts should be spent on helping everyone see that billionaires are the real source of the problem. The rights handbook is just to say the leftist billionaires are the problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago And there is like 2, but they aren't really on the left, but center right. Every other that labels them as a democratic billion is more right than thst permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is why more efforts should be spent on helping everyone see that billionaires are the real source of the problem. The rights handbook is just to say the leftist billionaires are the problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago And there is like 2, but they aren't really on the left, but center right. Every other that labels them as a democratic billion is more right than thst permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 point 1 year ago And there is like 2, but they aren't really on the left, but center right. Every other that labels them as a democratic billion is more right than thst permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (4 children) sort of, except the right usually (fucking always) fights to protect the rich. while the left (no Democrats don't fucking count) fight for equality and improving everyone's lives. so it is a left v right, you just renamed the categories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago (2 children) While that truism might annoy lovers of !politicalcompassmemes@lemmy.world it isn’t invalid, historically-speaking. Tell me more…From their first use in 1789 (long-short: seating positions) the definitions for left and right were fluid, but generally referred to “change” versus “status quo.” In Stalin’s era, left referred mostly to pro-worker policies, the economic change of the communist revolution. That convention was solidified in the US during the red scare, where left-wing came to mean “commie heresy.” After that period, the definition was gradually blurred again, perhaps by conservatives carrying forth the McCarthyist tradition of lumping any non-conformist view into “commie heresy.” Regardless, the resulting confusion in public political discourse is the reason Wayne Brittenden made the Political Compass website in 2001. By canonizing the economic-policy definition used by the Bolsheviks/McCarthyists as an actual X-axis spectrum, and the social-policy definitions of most other contexts as a Y-axis spectrum, one could easily map both dimensions as a cartesian coordinate. Quite handy. Still, as elegant and illuminating as that solution is, it remains a convention. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) tbf. those terms have evolved a lot since the French Revolution coined them. and given how fluid they are, in some conversations they might mean pure culture war issues like "THERE'S A TRANS FLAG IN COMIC BOOK MOVIE!!!!". but we can agree that in the bigger picture, left v right is about a top v bottom in power structures. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago Lol true. In fact, I guess always true for any historical use. At least, insofar as established power wants to keep playing the same game and under dog wants to play a different one. Shrug permalink fedilink source parent [–] uhdeuidheuidhed@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 year ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect The ratchet effect is a concept in sociology and economics illustrating the difficulty with reversing a course of action once a specific thing has occurred, analogous with the mechanical ratchet that allows movement in one direction and seizes or tightens in the opposite. Republicans push us in one direction, weak/complacent democrats don't fight back. It's part of the two-pronged strategy, and why anyone who supports establishment democrats is tacitly supporting republican policies. We really needed Bernie in 2016, but it shows where liberals' priorities lie. They become conservative as soon as their wealth is threatened. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 4 points 1 year ago (2 children) While that truism might annoy lovers of !politicalcompassmemes@lemmy.world it isn’t invalid, historically-speaking. Tell me more…From their first use in 1789 (long-short: seating positions) the definitions for left and right were fluid, but generally referred to “change” versus “status quo.” In Stalin’s era, left referred mostly to pro-worker policies, the economic change of the communist revolution. That convention was solidified in the US during the red scare, where left-wing came to mean “commie heresy.” After that period, the definition was gradually blurred again, perhaps by conservatives carrying forth the McCarthyist tradition of lumping any non-conformist view into “commie heresy.” Regardless, the resulting confusion in public political discourse is the reason Wayne Brittenden made the Political Compass website in 2001. By canonizing the economic-policy definition used by the Bolsheviks/McCarthyists as an actual X-axis spectrum, and the social-policy definitions of most other contexts as a Y-axis spectrum, one could easily map both dimensions as a cartesian coordinate. Quite handy. Still, as elegant and illuminating as that solution is, it remains a convention. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) tbf. those terms have evolved a lot since the French Revolution coined them. and given how fluid they are, in some conversations they might mean pure culture war issues like "THERE'S A TRANS FLAG IN COMIC BOOK MOVIE!!!!". but we can agree that in the bigger picture, left v right is about a top v bottom in power structures. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago Lol true. In fact, I guess always true for any historical use. At least, insofar as established power wants to keep playing the same game and under dog wants to play a different one. Shrug permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) tbf. those terms have evolved a lot since the French Revolution coined them. and given how fluid they are, in some conversations they might mean pure culture war issues like "THERE'S A TRANS FLAG IN COMIC BOOK MOVIE!!!!". but we can agree that in the bigger picture, left v right is about a top v bottom in power structures. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago Lol true. In fact, I guess always true for any historical use. At least, insofar as established power wants to keep playing the same game and under dog wants to play a different one. Shrug permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago Lol true. In fact, I guess always true for any historical use. At least, insofar as established power wants to keep playing the same game and under dog wants to play a different one. Shrug permalink fedilink source parent
[–] uhdeuidheuidhed@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 year ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect The ratchet effect is a concept in sociology and economics illustrating the difficulty with reversing a course of action once a specific thing has occurred, analogous with the mechanical ratchet that allows movement in one direction and seizes or tightens in the opposite. Republicans push us in one direction, weak/complacent democrats don't fight back. It's part of the two-pronged strategy, and why anyone who supports establishment democrats is tacitly supporting republican policies. We really needed Bernie in 2016, but it shows where liberals' priorities lie. They become conservative as soon as their wealth is threatened. permalink fedilink source parent