all 153 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 60 points 1 year ago* (101 children)

Some liberals don't even think there's a problem. They think movements like MAGA and Brexit are just low information voters being riled up by algorithms and populists.

  • source
  • hideshow 101 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    They don't just think they're low information voters, liberals make completely casual attributions to low IQ i.e. scientific racist garbage but completely normalized.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    There's a ton of people on all sides of the political spectrum who are low information because they do not understand how to vet sources.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Honey you are making an ass of yourself in exactly this way in this very thread

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Only if you accept Marxist/leftist theory as facts and you shouldn’t dothat since so much is unproven or proven to not be true. This is true for any political theory

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Pure mind palace stupidity. You're walking extremely worn paths used by people who are stupid but trying to sound smart. The "everyone is wrong" armchair wisdom that serves no purpose other than giving you an excuse to not investigate your own words.

    You don't even seem to know what 'marxist/leftist' theory is categorically but you have the vague notion that 'so much' is disproved.

    Put actual brain work behind that statement. I'm sick of watching you get treated with deference despite your bad faith and proud ignorance.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Yes, only a tiny fraction of the population can be part of the enlightened liberal elite that votes correctly like you and magically makes crapitalism function properly for everyone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Well it certainly takes a failure of those skills to utilize many of the socialist publications as a primary resource.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Eglin Chairforce heroes being useful again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I spent my weekend protesting ICE and feeding people in a soup kitchen. What the fuck are you doing to make things better for anyone else?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Yeah protesting ICE, soup kitchen volunteer and anti-communist cold warrior arguing in favor of capitalism and whining about tankies on lemmy. The libertarian type of imaginary liberal lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Note you can only complain about what I was doing to improve things. Is this because you did nothing and are just looking to attack those that are trying to make things better for others or is it because you dont think I should protest ICE or feed hungry people?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Making things better for others: whining about tankies and socialism on lemmy and doing a crappy imitation of Molyneux masterdebater trying to defend crapitalism.

    Anyway, do you even have a point or do you get paid by the comment?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    So you did nothing this weekend and your best choice is to pretend I did nothing? How does that work?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    You're really under the impression someone cares enough to argue with you over your random and completely irrelevant virtue signaling claims huh?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Still have nothing to point to that you did.

    Good to know how dedicated you are to your cause. Maybe dial back on attacking people if you aren’t contributing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Your only provable contribution to anything is spamming lemmy with libertarian word salads pretending to be a liberal but defending capitalism and trying to make crappy gotchas about what you supposedly did on the weekend.

    You're sure dedicated to your cause lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -33 points 1 year ago (84 children)
  • [+] 48 points 1 year ago (74 children)
  • [+] -44 points 1 year ago (51 children)
  • [+] 34 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [+] -12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [+] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [+] 8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [+] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [+] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [+] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Melvin, you should listen to Cowbee. You're misinformed, but don't have to stay that way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    This is a very typically American point of view, which tends to lump a lot of people together as "liberal" despite this internationally not being the norm at all.

    Here's a definition of liberalism:

    Liberalism is a political philosophy and ideology that emphasizes individual rights, liberties, and limited government. It promotes ideas like free markets, free trade, and social equality, while often advocating for a strong emphasis on individual autonomy and civil liberties.

    Note specifically how it says individual rights. The idea with liberalism is that if everyone is similarly unrestrained by the government, and has the same civil liberties, there is an even playing field in which individuals can personally grow and excel. This neatly links together with the liberal belief in a free market, free trade, etc...

    A strict liberal idealogy will also adopt several progressive policies w.r.t. civil liberties, like gay rights (as this causes social equality -> level playing field for competition). But liberalism is still a strictly capitalist idealogy, with a strong emphasis on the free market and free trade.

    Generally, this individualistic approach to rights is considered socially progressive and economically right-wing. And we see that this is the case in most countries around the world, e.g. Australia's liberal party or the Dutch VVD. The Dutch VVD is a good example to look at here, they are considered very firmly right-wing, but their party platform most closely matches to that of the DNC. In the US, the two major parties are both righg-wing, one is a moderately progressive right-wing party (with some left-wingers in there, but they aren't very influential w.r.t. party policy because it's such a small minority) and the other is a conservative/authoritarian right-wing party.

    Because both parties sit firmly on the right of the spectrum, they've come to distinguish themselves on social policy rather than economic policy. They've remapped the progressive-conservative axis on the left-right axis and called it a day. But in most countries, these axes are very much distinct. Here's the "political compass" for the Netherlands for example:

    Note how there are only two fairly fringe parties to the right of the VVD. Also it's interesting to note here that the PVV (the "far-right" party with the bird symbol near the bottom) isn't even all that far right. Their economic policies aren't actually all that focused on free market dynamics, and they do promote certain social policies. But their hardline immigration stance pushes them very firmly in the conservative camp. And although there's certainly a correlation between left-progressive and right-conservative, there are still major differences between the parties along this diagonal axis.

    Generally, actual left-wing people (be they progressive or conservative) don't like being lumped in with liberals, because they don't focus on as much on individual freedom but rather on collective freedom and on policies that benefit the collective. Hence their insistence on actually looking at the full political spectrum rather than the simplified/reducted version of it.

    You're not wrong that people in the US tend to call liberals "left-wing", but it's a very reductive, American perspective not shared by political scientists or the rest of the world.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (31 children)

    Someone hearing for the first time that Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher are staunch liberals.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [+] -23 points 1 year ago (30 children)
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism. They emerged together and the former was formed to justify the latter. Over the years it has branched out and there are many forms such as classical liberalism, neoliberalism, social liberalism, etc. but they all defend capitalist property rights and the market. Socialism emerged as the working class response to/critique of liberalism. In the US the term only refers to social liberals, who are in reality centrists. Americans call them leftists only because centrists are slightly to the left of right-wing politics.

    We're against liberalism as a whole because it's the ideology that justifies capitalism. We're against social liberals because they're seen as fence-sitting cowards and dangerous compromisers.


    This is a very introductory overview to liberalism:

    The most in-depth delving into it is Losurdo's Liberalism - A counter history, but you'd have to read many more foundational texts before that one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    How many books on this topic have you read? Are you aware of the conflicts between liberals and workers, prisoners, women, and colonized people for over 200 years? Do you know the history of the working class movement and its history of conflicts with liberals since the mid 1800s?

    Any one of us can answer these questions. You clearly can't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago

    You read books but do you read current news? Most of the world is still debating if they should be free of the government which is a binary that very much places liberalism on the left.

    Why are you holding such a Eurocentric perspective in face of the fact that most are not having the anticapitalist vs capitalist discussion you seem to think they are having?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    the right to private property

    Wow that sounds sooo leftist. I think you're about 150 years late in defining liberalism as "the left"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -5 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Liberals -> want the means of production to remain privatized aka capitalism Leftists -> want the means of production to be publicly owned aka socialism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    That presumes the binary is focused on economy when most nations are still debating freedom from the government and thus liberalism should be the start of the left.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    This presumes the liberal view that liberalism is truly "freedom from the government" whatever that means(it's not) and that such a thing is a requirement for a leftist position (it's not)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And you are presuming the discussions being had are about capitalism when they are still debating the role of the government in private ownership.

    It’s a eurocentric position. It’s odd how many “leftists” fall into this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    We just have a more nuanced understanding of politics than you do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    we just had a coalition of liberals, "social"democrats and greens here in Germany. Believe me no one thinks that liberals are left of center.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I just wish that people here would take time to explain why liberals are not left instead of just attacking you.

    Liberalism is not left because by definition they are socially progressive but economically conservative.

    I used to think the liberals are "left" because of the Americam mainstream media (by intentionally muddying political terms) interchange liberal between left. But thanks to Philosophy Tube's beginner's video explaining what it means, now I know better.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago

    They are taking a frankly eurocentric perspective which presumes the debate is anticapitalism vs capitalism when I would posit that most nations are still debating liberalism vs authoritarianism hence the claim that they are eurocentric as the binary only makes sense for Europe.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You're arguing with people on lemmy.ml.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Liberals are rightwing.

    There was a brief moment the US democratic party went social democratic, from Roosevelt to Carter and these days there's a small resurgance with Mamdani.

    But Clinton, Obama, Biden, Harris and Cuomo are all at the very least centre-right wing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -5 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Liberalism is the ideology of capitalism. They emerged together and the former was formed to justify the latter. Over the years it has branched out and there are many forms such as classical liberalism, neoliberalism, social liberalism, etc. but they all defend capitalist property rights and the market. Socialism emerged as the working class response to/critique of liberalism. In the US the term only refers to social liberals, who are in reality centrists. Americans call them leftists only because centrists are slightly to the left of right-wing politics.

    We're against liberalism as a whole because it's the ideology that justifies capitalism. We're against social liberals because they're seen as fence-sitting cowards and dangerous compromisers.


    Canada's two main parties are both right-wing. They support capitalism, and the rule of capitalists over the economy and government. The canadian conservative party agrees with them in that.

    Or look at Australia. Their two main parties are Labour vs the liberal party (both are pretty right wing, but in that country the liberals openly position themselves to the right of the other party).

    Or take Japan. Their far right party is called the liberal democrats.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This is a discussion about liberals in the US, not the liberal party of Canada, which is decidedly left of US politics as a whole.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    It's a failure of terms used in US politics. When we say "left" and "right" we pretty much exclusively are talking about their position in respect to one another as opposed to the actual policies the parties hold.

    Republicans are much more "conservative" (right wing) than Democrats (liberals) are, so the Republicans are the right and the Democrats become the "left" as they aren't as conservative and therefore they are "to the left" of Republicans.

    If you were to look at global definitions as to what it means to be a left wing party, Democrats really don't fit there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Only if you are eurocentric and accept liberalism as a default state. I would argue eurocentric perspectives are inherently problematic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Neoliberalism is absolutely not the default when we look at the whole world. If we look at the developed world it is the default. That is not the case for everyone.

    Your binary only makes sense for some of the world. That’s why I keep pointing to how eurocentric it us.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    No they’re not, I hate to break it to you but most conservatives are liberals. What you’re referring to is liberals picking up on social policies championed by the left.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Please define liberalism for me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Ok so based on that you should realise that every political party follows liberal economics. Hell even most conservative parties in the west pretend to stand up for liberal rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yes almost every political party believes in the right of private property and market economics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Economics is at the base of the political super structure.

    Edit: I suggest you read this: https://archive.org/details/ComManifesto/page/n3/mode/1up

    The whole split between liberals and socialists was based entirely on economics. There is a reason why Karl Marx wrote a whole book on economics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Lol no I’m describing the difference between socialists and liberals. Socialists of all stripes were anti capitalist and rooted in working class movements and anti capitlism. Marx had the most robust and scientific understanding of the liberal political order.

    Some edits for clarity and another edit: All socialists understood that they had to burn the liberal order to the ground if they wanted to try gain the type of freedom that they were looking for. Also most anarchists and socialists I have met have never had any problem with what I said about economics being the base of the political super structure what they usually disagree on is strategy and how to organise a society once the liberal order has been abolished.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Workingmen%27s_Association

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago (22 children)

    Liberalism is the start of the left unless you are incredibly eurocentric. Most of the world is still arguing liberalism vs authoritarianism and Europe is adopting that once again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [+] 9 points 1 year ago (21 children)
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (20 children)

    No "authoritarianism" is a end point on the binary that should used rather than capitalism vs anticapitalism it reflects the actual debates going on in non-Western nations

    You whole position is eurocentric because it accepts capitalism and liberalism as a default state.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [+] 9 points 1 year ago* (20 children)
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    That's a very marxist perspective. There very much is a debate going on all across the planet as to how much freedom from government and religion that people should have. If you bother to educate yourself on the politics of Muslim dominant nations you will see they are having those discussions right now.

    To be clear Cowbee, you are talking theory and I am asking you to pull your head out of your books and look at the world around you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [+] 7 points 1 year ago (19 children)
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (18 children)

    If you despise my assertion that you only read theory you should not make claims like "Iran is fairly liberal now". The Iranian government has a very heavy hand in that economy and economic freedoms don't exist like they do in capitalust economies.

    Try looking into African nations that are liberal in name only and literally any Muslim dominant nation that permits religion to have a direct role in the government if you want to see societies that are debating what degree of liberalism is acceptable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [+] 10 points 1 year ago (15 children)
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Most of the privatization of Iran has been going extremely slowly and the economy is still heavily controlled by the central authority. They on paper suggested things 15-20 years ago that they have been slow to adopt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 1 year ago* (14 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    No but being slow because you refuse to adopt the liberalizing policies is an indication that you aren’t serious about being liberal. It’s like suggesting China is serious about socialism when they have a stock market and income inequality is widening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 1 year ago (13 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (12 children)

    Of they aren’t making the change to permit liberalism then it does matter and currently my understanding is the state is dragging theor feet on privatization.

    Chinese workers do not control the means of production and there is a growing wealth inequality. The PRC is simply lying about their pursuits of socialism.

    You probably shouldn’t be talking about any nation given you have trouble grasping hiw “All but not really all” means not all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    There was growing wealth inequality, while at the same time all boats were rising. But now wealth inequality is shrinking, and all boats are still rising.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Well 4 years ago it was shrinking. How about post-COVID?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Maybe there’s hard data for that somewhere—I dunno—but since COVID, the Chinese state intentionally popped their housing construction bubble and made the capitalists take the hit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    They didn’t intentionally pop this bubble. It popped and they have done everything in their power to limit the damage. China might not be forthright about their policies but they do seem to be interested in preventing social collapse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    No, I am saying the crash of Evergrande was in no way a planned or negotiated event. Everyone knew there was trouble but no one “popped” it intentionally.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Three red lines was introduced in Aug. 2020. The collapse started in Sept. 2021. It was a centrally planned, managed collapse, with the intent of making the capitalists take the hit instead of the working class. It was very unlike the 2008 one in the US, where no orthodox economist saw it coming, and the government was caught with its pants down, and it ratfucked working class homeowners to save the private banks, who had written bad mortgages that they knew couldn’t be paid.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    “ Chinese workers do control the means of production through public ownership being the principle aspect of the economy, the large firms and key industries are firmly in the public sector. “

    No, they do not. Try looking at what is listed on the exchanges sometime. It might surprise you. It’s false to claim workers control the means of production when an investor class and investment banks exist.

    Im not presuming to know socialist “theory” better than those that choose to accept it but there are actual realities that most leftists actively avoid because it makes their claims invalid. In this case an investor class having been created since the revolution is a sign of failure.

    Finally you made a claim of all which ypu then made exceptions to that made the claim of “all” factually incorrect. You want to debate theory when I keep pointing out that “all of them but not really all of them” loterally means not all of them. As your claim that I reject outright relies on “all” your claim is not correct. Everyone who is “explaining” things is over looking that you said “not all” means “all”

    Sorry that your logic is not as solid or valid as you thought in this case.

    Again please remember your beliefs are not facts and much of what marxists claim has not been proven.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Except factually speaking, China has increase wealth inequality since their initial revolution and again in the cultural revolution so it really appears like they are abandoning socialism and giving it lip service like the USA is abandoning liberalism as a whole.

    You are ignoring realities to make it fit the propaganda you have accepted from the Chinese media/propaganda sphere. Hey does the state, billionaires, or the working classes own the press in China?

    The fact is kiddo. You have accepted propaganda and I am forcing you to confront the hypocrisy and inaccuracy within the notions you claim inappropriately as fact. Nothing I have said is incorrect unless te only permitted perspective is one that wholly accepts leftist theories as truth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This starts with you not getting that “all” means 100% not 100% with exceptions. Those backong your claims aee those that also do not see the numbers argument I was making and most seem to uncritically accept the propaganda you have accepted, so why would I listen to a larger number of people who aren’t getting it?

    If one person or 100 people claim the earth is the center of the solar system are you any more likely to accept that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago

    It’s a trend observable in all capitalist nations.

    Ok 100% of nations

    If you develop enough, the rate of profit falls, and so you need to expand outward to profit. This is the basis of imperialism, the carving out of the global south for profit. Across the west, this is a fact, even if it manifests in different ways.

    Ok so there are exceptions that make it not observable in all nations only those that have met specific situations (presuming any of the claims are valid which has never been demonstrated to be the case).

    It’s A or B. It cannot be observable in all capitalist systems if it has not happened in most and likely cannot happen in them ever. That means the presumption is not inherently valid like you are treating it.

    You are treating your opinions as fact. Others here are doing the same. No one has been able to provide anything to support this. They only engage in ad hominem or complete misunderstandings of the claim.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The Iranian government has a very heavy hand in that economy and economic freedoms don’t exist like they do in capitalust economies.

    Many of us are socialists, and we don’t take issue with a state constraining the capitalist class’ economic freedom. If you live in a neoliberal hellscape like most of us, you ought to want it more constrained, too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    What if a leftist invented wojack?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    I mean the internet is the worst place to do politics so idc if the right used some meme I made up. Want to do politics go outside, it was campaigning and canvassing that won the election for Zohran, it’s also what got Die Linke 10% of the vote in Germany. Real politics happens in the real world. Yeah the right wing is loud online, but they’re fucking cowards in real life. Most of the leftists I know are doing shit in real life not posting. FYI I told the wojack joke in real life then somebody posted it on the web, same with shocked pikachu also a joke told in real life. You’d be suprised how much doing stuff in real life achieves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    You're right. I'm one of the ones who got offline from the big social media sites. Honestly, I feel like it's a civic duty and have tried to convince everyone of Fediverse accounts and have failed. I also don't know what's going on in my friend's lives, and I even got off Bluesky due to tracking or some other offense I can't remember. But I can tell you for sure, once the US gov becomes destabilized enough, that data collection from all these years will be abused to the point that all the people in the "I have nothing to hide" club are seriously going to regret being on Facebook and Instagram, etc. This surveillance state is going to be awful when they succeed, and they will.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    Lol ok mr very online guy. You know that those media organisations you mentioned are all funded by billionaires. People like me aren’t funded because we say stuff that is uncomfortable and I don’t give a shit about appeasing advertisers. The biggest difference you can make is in the real world, being there for your community volunteering tennant unions etc. Posting is the lowest effort and easiest thing you can do. Actual struggle happens in real life.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    What are you referring to? Who is you people? I’m sorry people do know if you knocked on doors, just because you’re not doing it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t get results.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Um to have an actual real connection to the person you’re talking to and not just talk to some faceless name and avatar on a website? To show people that you actually care about them and that a political project is important enough for you to get your ass off the couch for. To maybe connect with other like minded people so you can organise more?

    Holy shit I’m actually starting to realise what people meant when they said the .world people are crazy. How online are you that I have to explain that talking to people in real life is nicer than just communicating online. I order you to touch grass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    The right have been a more or less hegemonic force since the 80s. There is a reason why I spend hours online. The reason why the right can do all this is because they get paid to. They get millions of funding thrown at them by oligarchs, that’s why they are so visible not because they’re some creative marketing geniuses. Like so many things in life it comes down to resources and who had access to them. Meanwhile the left has to rely on people like me who are going to sacrifice their free time and creativity for something they believe in.

    The left has all the things you mentioned as well, and is online as well. Currently one of the biggest podcasts on Patreon is hosted by two lefties. I also want to point out that for most of the lefts history being a leftist meant sacrifice of some sort. If you don’t want to do that fine but stop removed at me about how the left refuses to adapt. We are up against capital, if you haven’t figured that out and what it implies then idk what to do for you.

    That’s why going outside and doing things in real life is important fund raising for example is very important. You can also donate to lefty content creators that you like. Currently a bunch of them are getting cancelled or demonetised thanks to their support against genocide. The left has been in decline since the fall of the USSR so idk why you think this is some kind of new phenomena. The fact that they’re slowly making a comeback is actually pretty cool and gives me a small slither of hope sometimes. If you just want an easy ride then join one of the billionaire parties, the pay is better and you’ll have to work less.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›