129
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
129 points (94.5% liked)
US News
2048 readers
51 users here now
News from within the empire - From a leftist perspective
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Conservatives really believe they can Hitler Youth their way out of diversity.
If only they put half that effort into funding schools adequately so kids would have the class sizes and resources to learn. Nah, that's for 1st world countries, not shitholes like us.
Your daily reminder that this is a Cold War era term, so 1st world = US and allies; 2nd world = USSR, China, and allies; 3rd = everyone else
I think you meant 2nd world countries ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Which world is a plutocracy?
We're that one in practice.
Also, language evolves rapidly, terms change meanings over time often.
Try getting 100 random people or even college graduates and try to get agreement on the modern meaning and usage of socialism.
Words and terms evolve, even dictionaries make regular changes to react to already in use changes over time.
I think the more modern usage is 1st world= developed socioeconomic infrastructure 2nd world = developing nation 3rd world = impoverished/underdeveloped nation.
Definitely the capitalist and colonizing “first world” countries, no question. Their wealthy even control Global South countries to a large extent.
If you meant Global North and Global South, just say it. But it’s completely ludicrous to suggest the US is a Global South country, so I suspect you didn’t mean that.
First world are democracies, second world were communist countries, third world were everything else.
lol.
This is a fun one. Assuming communist countries aren't democratic (which is incorrect), then the third world is mysteriously neither democratic nor communist. It must be a strange situation to be in, to think that the 1st is democratic, but then the 3rd which is controlled by the 1st is not, and somehow the commies are the anti-democratic ones.
If one examines that situation, they'll inevitably question why those countries would be kept undemocratic but also anti-communist (which again is supposed to be the negation of democracy) by those very same democratic countries, but that's dangerous thoughts for a 1st worlder.
No joke. There's so much nuance thats just glossed over.
Any country can democratically decide to democratize the means of production (that's what communism is, it's like us, but with EXTRA democracy) Marx said it was inevitable. I think he's right.
Neo-libs find it impossible that a society would actively choose a government that puts the importance of everyones quality of life, establishing a medium or high floor thru social programs, ahead of making money.
Cuz how could anything be more important than making money, amirite?
Reminds me of conservatives screaming voter fraud. Cuz if a democrat won then there's was clearly fraud; no REAL American would vote for a Democrat, right boys, right?!?
Like holy fuck people. Do you ever hear yourselves? Have any kind of introspection?
(R's screaming voter fraud... They are the party of projection, if there's fraud, id check Republican wins first. Notably the Senate wins of Rand Paul, Mitch McConnel, Susan Collins and the Fuckface from South Carolina...all were polling waaaaay down before election day. Turns out they ALL had a +17 point swing. +17. That sure seems weird...what, we can't check those machines? REALLY?!)
Bourgeois "democracy" / multi-party parliamentary democracy is just another name for capitalist dictatorships. There is no safer shell for capitalist rule, than bourgeois democracy, whether it be in the US, UK, Australia, Japan, or elsewhere.
https://dessalines.github.io/essays/crash_course_socialism.html#democracy