all 45 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 54 points 7 months ago (2 children)

"socialism is cancer"

car door shuts loudly

gets on public road

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    I get this example and I see it often when this comes up. But I bet there are people who would happily privatize the roads and charge everyone tolls for using them. Trucks transporting goods to stores would pass that cost on to consumers so you’re still paying for their road anyway but not through taxes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 98 points 7 months ago (11 children)

    Black people tried! A couple times to build a black community it they were very successful. Then white people people would get envious and blow it up.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    Or bulldoze the middle of it for a freeway, which is what happened to MLK's neighborhood (a.k.a. "the richest Negro street in the world") here in Atlanta.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 25 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    They did the same in Tulsa's Greenwood district

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    I figured that's what Aeao was referencing to begin with, considering that he wrote "blow it up" and I don't think he was being figurative.

    Frankly, even though we're citing both of them as examples of black wealth being suppressed for the purpose of this discussion, I would struggle to call Tulsa and Atlanta "the same" because the tactics were so much more brutal in the former (firebombing and mass-murder vs. eminent domain).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago*

    I get them all mixed up. It’s happened a lot I different ways. But yeas they blew one the fuck up.

    And yeah it’s hard to rank “bad” blown up and killed is worse. It is all bad tho, they other time they would’ve used a bomb if they needed to.

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

    Seneca Village has entered the chat

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    I brought up Sweet Auburn because it was a particularly rich Black neighborhood and therefore an example supporting the point about what happened after "white people would get envious," specifically.

    If we're just talking about historical Black neighborhoods that were razed for public works projects, I could cite plenty more examples just in Atlanta alone (Lightning, Butttermilk Bottom, etc.) 'cause pushing out poor Black people like that happened all the time (and in fact still does, albeit somewhat less blatantly).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 7 months ago

    "socialism is cancer"

    ~temporarily embarrassed millionaire

  • source
  • [+] 17 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 25 points 7 months ago*

    Even if he never said that, you can tell he's an absolute prick with the profit chart emoji as part of his username.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago

    Capitalism is cancer

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Capitalists love these dumbass platitudes.

    "Socialism is cancer" >>> Absurd

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    FD Signifier has entered the chat.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Jews had the Holocaust Black people had Jim Crow. Israeli Jews are fucking psychotic, we don't need another group going ape shit now.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    It's funny how media literate can see Stephan's fear. Response is genius btw

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    "Jeffrey, go to college, man! Make something of yourself. Me and the fat man, we messed our lives up. We fucked up in the game, man. We products of the environment. Don't be a idiot, man. Make us proud. Do shit different, baby." - Sweet

    Source - GTA SA The Introduction short film.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Every time someone says a dogshit take like this, I want them to very clearly and slowly define for me, what they mean by socialism. Then I will be pulling up my phone, and we can read the Wikipedia article together.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    Securities tax, payable in shares of the security. 2% of all registered securities (stocks, bonds, other financial instruments; anything the SEC would regulate) are transferred to the IRS every year. The IRS liquidates those shares on the open market over time, such that no more than 1% of total traded volume is from the sale of liquidated shares.

    Exempt the first $10 million in a portfolio held be a natural person. No exemption for corporate portfolios.

    This will drive business ownership and returns away from the ultra-wealthy and toward the working class. If you're a business seeking investor capital, you're getting it from the general public, not the billionaires. The billionaires will be busy pulling their money out of the markets.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (9 children)

    What's annoying is that socialism and capitalism are not opposites. Yes, capital is needed to produce more than before, but If a community bands together to buy a factory to build clothes better and faster, that's socialist capitalism and works well. The problem is people gaming the system and stepping on peoples faces to keep all the capital for themselves.

    Edit: thank you all for the comments, you all were right, I was taking the focus of the word "capital" and conflating it with "capalism". I was trying to say that aquiring capital is a worthy venture in general, however I see the argument is with private ownership (i.e. the definition capatilsm).

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    The problem is people gaming the system and stepping on peoples faces to keep all the capital for themselves.

    Yeah but they're also sociopaths that have bought into "effective altruism" and thus believe their becoming more rich and more powerful not only feels great for them, but it's also a net good overall in a moral sense.

    The problem overall IMO is sociopaths. They game every system. The only fix is legal and structural changes to eliminate


    or at very least greatly lessen


    their ability to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    Effective altruism doesn't deserve to be slandered like this. It's what the better billionaires were into, and few and far between. Some may have given it a bad name through some weird personal guilt trip, but it was generally the good thing on the label.

    I generally agree that we need heavy socialist controls on capitalism. I'm a capitalist, yeah, but "pure" capitalism isn't a thing and is clearly dumb. If you don't have controls, billionaires will use money to corrupt/change the rules. THIS is the biggest thing you have to prevent. We can argue about how to do so, but there shouldn't be argument that it needs to be done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    Effective altruism doesn’t deserve to be slandered like this.

    Dude, effective altruism sucks. A movement is what it does, and what this movement does is spawn cults and give sociopaths cover for getting rich via any means possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    I've said something along these lines before but that was when I was much newer to socialism.

    Now I'd say that if a community owned the means of clothes production that is not capitalism. If they give/sell them that also does not have to be capitalistic as long as the goal is not using commodities to make money for money's sake.

    If you take that money and put it towards building other commodities thats also fine, any most political systems need a way to make new things. Marx called this C-M-C where you sell a commodity (C), transform it into money (M) and then use that money to get a new commodity (C). This makes sense because a commodity is only as valuable as you can use it, it's use-value BUT if the end goal is money. Then it becomes a M-C relationship. Now the goal is money. Money is spent to buy stuff for the sole purpose of making money, there is no desire to use it only to extract the markup costs

    Lastly the people working there must own it. If a state-like figure owns it and makes the decisions in a heavy top-down fashion and profit is not openly shared then I think that is just state capitalism.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    They are diametrically oppositional and anyone who says otherwise is completely ignorant of political theory.

    Capitalism is an economic system which utilizes a system private ownership over the means of production. Socialism is a system of collective ownership. You cannot have private and collective ownership simultaneously.

    Do not confuse capitalism with commerce.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago*

    You cannot have private and collective ownership simultaneously.

    Well, there is state capitalism like China, where production is theoretically owned publicly via representatives of the people, but in practice is more like private ownership with extra steps.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    What is Black Capitalism? Is this a term I'm not familiar with?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    I’m not re-reading “the power broker” to say for certain. But probably. Yeah he really liked doing things like that so … probably.

  • source
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    They'll never show evidence for this completely ahistorical claim.

  • source
  • 2 comments in c/mop view that post
    [–] 21 points 7 months ago

    You don’t fight fire with fire. You fight fire with water. We’re gonna fight racism with solidarity. We're not gonna fight capitalism with Black capitalism. We’re gonna fight capitalism with socialism. Socialism is the people. If you’re afraid of socialism, you’re afraid of yourself.

    —Fred Hampton

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago

    Black capitalism was African tribes attacking other African tribes to take over their land and sell them as slaves, then sold that land to white capitalists.

  • source