765
evergreen meme (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 3 months ago

I’m so fucked up by all of this. I don’t know what anything means anymore and depending on who I’m talking to, I’m either a faithless child-diddling monster, or I’m a genocide-supporting class traitor.

And like. I’d consider myself a far left liberal, in the sense of how the U.S. defined liberal when I learned the terms, where it was more a place on the political spectrum, rather than a codified set of ideas.
Right to left, I’d define the that spectrum as Reactionary (Alt-right), conservative, centrist, liberal, and revolutionary (leftist, I think?). I know that those terms have different meanings in other countries.
I’d consider the Republican Party to currently be between conservative and alt-right, with the Democratic Party being centrist with liberal window dressing.

I think the U.S. political system is fucked. It was never intended to accommodate political parties, let alone the nearly 250 years of maneuvering by capitalists to slip reigns onto the government, which now appears to have fully succeeded. I believe that the embrace of fascism by the Republican Party is a means to control the ~60% of people who are left of center and without cohesive political representation because of limitations of the U.S. political system/bastardization of it/the pernicious influence of capitalism.

I don’t support the Democratic Party, nor do I really feel the U.S. government is in a place to fix itself without some foundational things changing. I don’t think, realistically, that those things can be changed without mass engagement and effort, which… sigh. I’m doing what I can.

But also, I don’t believe a revolt or some form of dramatic U.S. government reformation is possible. As a result, the folks that are already demanding change and have given up hope for reforming the system are hostile to me, and the other folks fall into the camp of being disengaged/only mildly upset or even desirous of a slide into fascism. It feels like there isn’t really enough people who are unified who want to change course without throwing the whole thing out.
I honestly feel kind of alone.

Here comes the ramble:What happens if the U.S. does elect Trump and it swings full fascism?
Will the disengaged people even know if it gets bad enough that they should start engaging? Congress is already working on banning TikTok because of Gaza. A congress that doesn’t need to pretend to abide by the law would have already done that 8-10 months ago. The media, owned by a few corporations, already mostly shapes the U.S. worldview. What happens when the outliers - PBS starts parroting Fox News talking points by government mandate, and independent news sites are suddenly no longer reachable?
If folks do know things are bad, and they do band together to try to do something about it - how do they manage? Any number of reasons can be dreamed up to disenfranchise. In my state, weed is legal. A quick cross-reference of the state weed registry with the voter registry and possibly a quick demographics check (because we know they’d do that), and the federal government can throw whoever they want in jail, prevent us from ever voting, or remove our ability to earn a living for any dreamed up reason. Revolution? A country that’s geographically unassailable will continue to be unassailable. Plus you have the propaganda/information control and the general docility of the U.S. population.

I’m not trying to challenge or debate anyone here. I don’t think you’re stupid, nor do I think the ideals are bad. I fucking wish society was more altruistic and smarter.
I just… don’t see any realistic or actionable outcome other than to keep fighting for every inch using the tools we have, even if they are faulty, entrenched systems.
Call me propagandized, unimaginative, cynical or stupid, or… whatever, I guess. I just don’t see other viable options, and I think broadcasting moral superiority, embracing divisiveness and exhibiting hostility is going to create roadblocks, should we need to unite. If we can.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 months ago

And like. I’d consider myself a far left liberal, in the sense of how the U.S. defined liberal when I learned the terms, where it was more a place on the political spectrum, rather than a codified set of ideas.

The funny thing is, the US defined liberal is the codified set of ideas, liberalism is just to the left of the median in America. America is that far-right.

Right to left, I’d define the that spectrum as Reactionary (Alt-right), conservative, centrist, liberal, and revolutionary (leftist, I think?). I know that those terms have different meanings in other countries.

The problem is that you jump straight from Liberal to Revolutionary, there's a spectrum of thought among leftists. Revolution may be correct, but there are schools of reformist thought as well. Additionally, liberals and all those to the right of them are Reactionary, just in varying degrees. A "centrist" would be left of liberalism, ie a Social Democrat or Market Socialist.

I’d consider the Republican Party to currently be between conservative and alt-right, with the Democratic Party being centrist with liberal window dressing.

The Democrats are Neoliberal, there's no set dressing. Liberalism is just right-wing. Conservatives are far-right populists, ie fascists in some cases.

I think the U.S. political system is fucked. It was never intended to accommodate political parties, let alone the nearly 250 years of maneuvering by capitalists to slip reigns onto the government, which now appears to have fully succeeded.

On the contrary, the US was designed by wealthy Capitalists to benefit themselves. The system is working as intended, protecting Capitalists.

I believe that the embrace of fascism by the Republican Party is a means to control the ~60% of people who are left of center and without cohesive political representation because of limitations of the U.S. political system/bastardization of it/the pernicious influence of capitalism.

Fascism is a class-colaborative alliance between the bourgeoisie and petite bourgeoisie against the proletariat and lumpenproletariat along nationalist lines to attempt to forcibly return to a less-decayed state of Capitalism.

I don’t support the Democratic Party, nor do I really feel the U.S. government is in a place to fix itself without some foundational things changing. I don’t think, realistically, that those things can be changed without mass engagement and effort, which… sigh. I’m doing what I can.

Correct. Join an org!

But also, I don’t believe a revolt or some form of dramatic U.S. government reformation is possible. As a result, the folks that are already demanding change and have given up hope for reforming the system are hostile to me, and the other folks fall into the camp of being disengaged/only mildly upset or even desirous of a slide into fascism. It feels like there isn’t really enough people who are unified who want to change course without throwing the whole thing out.
I honestly feel kind of alone.

Reform cannot work, Revolution is the only way. Build up dual power, organize, and try to build up parallel structures. Organize!

What happens if the U.S. does elect Trump and it swings full fascism?

Beating Trump won't stop the conditions for fascism, only Leftism can. Fascism can only be kicked down the road, until the ratchet effect takes us there anyways, unless Leftists organize.

I’m not trying to challenge or debate anyone here. I don’t think you’re stupid, nor do I think the ideals are bad. I fucking wish society was more altruistic and smarter.
I just… don’t see any realistic or actionable outcome other than to keep fighting for every inch using the tools we have, even if they are faulty, entrenched systems.
Call me propagandized, unimaginative, cynical or stupid, or… whatever, I guess. I just don’t see other viable options, and I think broadcasting moral superiority, embracing divisiveness and exhibiting hostility is going to create roadblocks, should we need to unite. If we can.

You've got the core of it, but not the theory. Try reading Leftist theory! Whether it be Marxist or Anarchist, leftists have been attempting to fix the system and are growing in power.

[-] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 3 months ago

I’ve said this to you previously, but - I appreciate you.

When I find the ability to tame my ADHD and time constraints a bit more than current, I’ll work on digging into The State and Revolution - because you are kind, and you are thoughtful.

[-] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 months ago

Fellow ADHDer here, I'm an anarchist so it might not be the kind of thing you're looking for but I've found the Audible Anarchist podcast to be really good. Relatively short (10-20 minute) essay readings, I like them when I'm doing chores and need the stimulation.

[-] skulbuny@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Hell yeah a fellow adhd anarchist

[-] within_epsilon@beehaw.org 2 points 3 months ago

Audible Anarchist is great. Anarchist Library is another great resource depending on what you can hyperfocus on.

[-] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago

Hell yeah, I've had a bunch of recommendations for things on the library. Currently I've got a physical copy of Dolgoff's Anarchist Collectives I'm trying to finish

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Not who you replied to, but I've spoken with them before. They haven't read much theory at all, if any, hence the recommendations last time. I'm sure they will appreciate your recs as well, they aren't a committed Marxist or anything.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago

Oh, it's you! I remember! Thanks for the kind words.

For what it's worth, eReaders make reading theory much easier for me, and I also have ADHD. Audiobooks also work for people too, but I like to reread sections sometimes.

[-] Mjpasta710@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Because every proletariat revolution has resulted in equality and not a speed run to mass poverty... Why would it work this time? When has it ever worked in reality? Where's the beautiful shining example of Marxist success?

Let's copy that now. (I can't find an example of it).

When do you realize revolution is an acceleration of entropy in society.

You're proposing to bloodlet society and end up with less for the people, and more for the rich.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 months ago

Because every proletariat revolution has resulted in equality and not a speed run to mass poverty... Why would it work this time? When has it ever worked in reality? Where's the beautiful shining example of Marxist success?

Cuba, the USSR, PRC, etc. All resulted in vastly improved conditions with respect to their previous conditions. Cuba was a fascist slave society, Russia was under the underdeveloped tyranny of the Tsar, and China was run by Nationalists and had been colonized for a century. In the USSR and PRC, life expectancy doubled.

If your current understanding is that society was fine and dandy, and then became worse after implementing Socialism, then you really need to open a history book. Life certainly didn't become amazing and perfect, but life did get better gradually after overthrowing their brutal previous conditions.

Let's copy that now. (I can't find an example of it).

What do you mean by this? There are AES states like Cuba today.

When do you realize revolution is an acceleration of entropy in society.

There's no "entropy" in society, society is not made up of "energy." Revolution is a consequence of unsustainable conditions, like previously shown.

You're proposing to bloodlet society and end up with less for the people, and more for the rich.

How? Please explain what this means. I am advocating for democratically controlling production so that it can service the needs and wants of the people, rather than wealthy Capitalists as it does in curreny society.

[-] Mjpasta710@midwest.social 2 points 3 months ago

As I mentioned, the examples of this working out in real life. Not so good. The USSR, currently dissolved and not a model I'd be interested in emulating. The folks I know who lived in it don't want it back either.

Cuba, I'd say they had equality for citizens which they don't, not a good example either.

China... Really?? Marxism? Really?? We're glossing over Mao Zedong and a history of mass murder.

"The truths of Marxism are myriad, but it all comes down to one line: 'Rebellion is justified!'" When the CCP was waging revolution and still trying to gain national power, this statement was a powerful shot in the arm. Once it became the ruling party, to bring this up again was to invite revolt against itself. That was exactly what happened in the Cultural Revolution. Its result was catastrophic, because Mao as a revolutionary was unable to make the transition from "breaking" to "making". He once claimed: "There is no making without breaking. The making is in the breaking." But that was just revolutionary romanticism misaligned with reality. In truth, it is much harder to "make" than to "break". Source - https://www.thinkchina.sg/politics/new-paradigm-needed-china-cannot-achieve-common-prosperity-marxism-and-class-struggle

You're expressing wonderful ideals.

They don't seem to line up with the execution in the real world though.

My argument is that it won't and hasn't ever.

When a developer writes a program that doesn't do what it's supposed to, it gets rewritten. Marxists just keep trying the same philosophy. Maybe if we murder more people it'll work.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Mjpasta710@midwest.social 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

How? Please explain what this means. I am advocating for democratically controlling production so that it can service the needs and wants of the people, rather than wealthy Capitalists as it does in curreny society.

You're advocating revolution, if I'm reading your words correctly.

That involves a radical restructuring of society. You're advocating violently modifying the roles of individuals to fit your new goals. That has historically and always involved a bloodletting.

As I understand it Marxism is about being authoritarian in government (telling people what to do, and punishing those who don't comply) and ensuring via government that resources are equally distributed. This concentrates power among the ruling elite. Historically, this continues the corruption it claims to end. So, what I'm saying essentially - that Marxism is a neat philosophy - It doesn't line up with reality or achieve its stated goals.

It does kill all the dissenting opinions and create the echo chamber that has consistently been corrupted and hasn't stood the test of time.

So if there's to be a bloodletting. Let it begin with those asking for it, first.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 months ago

You're advocating revolution, if I'm reading your words correctly.

That involves a radical restructuring of society. You're advocating violently modifying the roles of individuals to fit your new goals. That has historically and always involved a bloodletting.

I'm advocating for Marxism. Revolution will happen regardless, Capitalism continues to decay and conditions for the Proletariat continue to crumble. Marxists should do their best to make sure this revolution is equitable for the people and democratic in nature, rather than be co-opted by fascists.

As I understand it Marxism is about being authoritarian in government (telling people what to do, and punishing those who don't comply) and ensuring via government that resources are equally distributed. This concentrates power among the ruling elite. Historically, this continues the corruption it claims to end. So, what I'm saying essentially - that Marxism is a neat philosophy - It doesn't line up with reality or achieve its stated goals.

You're wrong on quite a few things here.

  1. Marxism is about having a Democratic Worker-State. All governments "tell people what to do and punish those who don't comply," even Anarchists. There were forced labor camps in Revolutionary Catalonia.

  2. Marxism is not about even or equal distribution of resources. Marxism is about meeting everyones needs with what is produced as best as possible. People have unequal needs and unequal contributions.

  3. This does not "concentrate power around the ruling elite." It's a shift from power in the hands of Capitalists to power in the hands of the Workers.

  4. There is corruption in AES states, yes, but this is not "the same corruption," not even close. Capitalist states function via corruption, and anti-corruption policies are extremely popular in AES countries.

Marxism does line up with reality and does meet its goals, you have been wrong at every line and supported it with your feelings, not supporting evidence.

It does kill all the dissenting opinions and create the echo chamber that has consistently been corrupted and hasn't stood the test of time.

It allows dissenting opinions, just not the resurgence of Capitalism, just like now we do not allow Monarchists to retake power. Marxism has also withstood the test of time.

So if there's to be a bloodletting. Let it begin with those asking for it, first.

More vibes and unclear positions.

[-] Mjpasta710@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago

More vibes and unclear positions.

A person doesn't have to have a clear position or solution to know that something isn't right. This revolution you're expecting, when does it start?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

In 2019 I realized America was going fascist and there was nothing to stop it. So, I’m with you. I don’t give up hope though, because I don’t want to be bitter.

[-] Facebones@reddthat.com 3 points 3 months ago

I think the big thing is to not demean the people who are calling for bigger measures. Plenty of us appreciate that gradual sustainable reform where life goes on and everyone keeps going to work then going home would be super cool, but dont think its possible. I don't really see people get confronted for wanting to try reform, its when reform types tell more revolutionary folk that they're "just as bad" for not wanting to roll over for something thats increasingly imminent.

You seem like a fine, thoughtful person. Thats great, we need that. Just understand we also need people who are preparing for and discussing what comes next if reform doesn't work.

[-] whoreticulture@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Funny how you say people voicing support for revolution have given up hope. That's literally the most hopeful wish I can think of. Liberals resigned to a system that ... systemically ... rejects any real structural change may have hope, but with very limited scope of imagination, and disregarding a lot of the structural harm.

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I have no idea what any of these terms mean anymore. For a long time, I thought Liberal was just everything left of center and leftist was just synonymous with Liberal. It's too fucking confusing.

Right wingers are way better about ignoring their differences and I suspect much of the granular nature of left wingers right now may be a "divide and conquer" tactic by bad actors.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 months ago

Liberal only means "left of center" in places where Liberalism, the ideology, is left of that location's median. Ie, in America, Liberalism can be considered left, despite Liberalism as an ideology being right-wing, in favor of Capitalism.

Leftism refers to Socialism, ie Anarchism or Marxism. Liberals are not in that spectrum, it isn't "divide and conquer," liberals have historically sided with fascists against leftists, because liberalism and fascism are uncomfortably close.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Right to left, I’d define the that spectrum as Reactionary (Alt-right), conservative, centrist, liberal, and revolutionary (leftist, I think?).

You are mixing desire of change(conservative vs reformist) with relations of policy and economy(socialism vs capitalism).

I’d consider the Republican Party to currently be between conservative and alt-right, with the Democratic Party being centrist with liberal window dressing.

You call them centrist, I call them center-right at best. It looks more right-wing than LDPR(former LDPSS, first right-wing party in USSR) or Russia of the Future(Navalny's party, center-right).

But also, I don’t believe a revolt or some form of dramatic U.S. government reformation is possible.

Yeah, it's 21st century. I don't see it happening.

I fucking wish society was more altruistic and smarter.

Smart society needs members of that society to be smart. Which means they need to attend school regardless of having a farm.

I just… don’t see any realistic or actionable outcome other than to keep fighting for every inch using the tools we have, even if they are faulty, entrenched systems. Call me propagandized, unimaginative, cynical or stupid, or… whatever, I guess. I just don’t see other viable options,

Welcome to political apathy.

and I think broadcasting moral superiority,

If only legism was moral superiority. Then legists of Third Reich would be "morally superior". Well, they did claim to be superior everywhere. Didn't help in Nuremberg.

Meanwhile people who built universal education, universal healthcare, public transit and welfare systems in my country weren't legists.

[-] deaf_fish@lemm.ee -1 points 3 months ago

Fascism is like the rising ocean. Imagine all the "brown people" near the shores and the white people at The high ground. You know out group versus in group.

The rise in fascism is causing the ocean level to rise drowning the people who are closest to the shore. This is analogous to people dying to political nonsense that otherwise wouldn't.

If Trump gets elected. The ocean rises faster. In the next 4 years we'll see a lot more people. Drowned.

If Biden gets elected the ocean still rises but it rises slower than with Trump. People still die, but less people die.

From a defeating fascist perspective. A slower rising ocean means more time to organize and spread information.

Also, politics is both the hardest thing and the easiest thing to understand. I consider myself a pretty intelligent person and it still took me awhile to really understand what was going on and I needed help. It's crazy! It's like everyone is playing chess on the same board. Some people are making basic moves. Some people are just pawns. Only a few people are playing 5D chess and mopping up the field.

load more comments (25 replies)
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
765 points (90.7% liked)

Lefty Memes

4263 readers
1001 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!

Rules

0. Only post socialist memes

That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)

1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here

Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.

2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such,

as well as condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.

3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.

That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).

4. No Bigotry.

The only dangerous minority is the rich.

5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)

6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.

Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.

7. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

(This is not a definitive list, the spirit of the other rules still counts! Eventual duplicates with other rules are for emphasis.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS