• AidsKitty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    I see we are reaching for “full retard” today. If you love communism go and live in a communist country.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      That’s the plan! Though I want to aid in turning my own country Communist, as that would benefit the most people globally, or at least take down the US Empire.

      Ableism aint cool either.

      • atmorous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Read my comment on this post. Think Capitalism mixed with Socialism would be good alternative for everyone

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          I responded to it, but I want to respond to this as well. There’s really no such thing as “mixing” Capitalism with Socialism. Private and Public property can be mixed, but what determines Capitalism or Socialism is if the former is the principle aspect of the economy, or the latter. By principle, I mean which controls the state, large firms, and key industries.

        • pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          That’s what most European countries (social democracies) are doing. Safety net so you don’t randomly become homeless (you keep getting a part of your salary for a while, and even without any money there are enough places to sleep for all homeless people, at least in Austria), free healthcare, …

          • m532@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            There’s no socialism in social democrats, only capitalists doing concessions so the people don’t demand socialism

            • pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              I’m going to university for 27€ per semester while getting free healthcare and subsidised housing and lunch. If I were to become homeless I could go to a shelter for sleeping and food. Additionally you get a certain percentage of your salary (starting at ~80%, becomes less as the months pass, but it’s plenty of time to find a new job) after getting fired. Schools are free and there are basically no private schools because there’s simply no need, public education is good. After childbirth you also get money until you can work again, for up to 3 years. There are regulations against monopolies and cartels. Etc etc.

              imo this is the ideal system

              • m532@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                15 days ago

                "My men enslave people in africa to get rubber and murder them if they dont gather enough rubber and then we ship it here and then we have lots of rubber in belgium and the suffering happens somewhere else where I’ll never be

                imo this is the ideal system"

                - king of belgium, probably

                • pumpkinseedoil@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  What about not enslaving people?

                  And of course people in weaker economies get paid less, they also need less since everything is cheaper.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                16 days ago

                The whole problem is that your system is built on the backs of super-exploiting the Global South. You’ve exported the bulk of the hard labor that allows you to live comfortable lives, and maintain it through the domination of private financial Capital.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Cool agitprop posters like what OP posted rarely give you a particularly nuanced perspective due to their limited space. The intended effect is to spark conversation, not to beam Marxism into the heads of anyone who sees it.

      • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        It reminds me of how people hated on “defund the police” messaging. I got into an argument with someone that focused on the phrase alone and was completely uninterested in a genuine discussion about what it means. Like what do they expect? An entire novel written on a poster or a tweet to appease them? The point is to kick the conversation off, not spoon-feed you.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Yep, you hit the nail on the head! Effective agitprop sparks conversations and forces engagement, not just people immediately dismissing it or accepting it before going on with their days.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          For real… 🫠

          If I write an essay, people don’t genuinely read it, if I write short responses I either over-simplify or manage to raise more questions than I answer… at least, it feels that way sometimes, lol

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Thanks, I appreciate it! I know there are people who do, some of them send me DMs or reply directly to me so it all justifies the efforts I do, I just wish the human brain worked better with direct argumentation than it does when viewing a debate from the outside. Ie, I wish those I carefully spend time writing for took it to heart more than onlookers tend to, but the net result is still positive so I keep with it.

              Thanks again!

          • rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            Your comments are consistently high quality and there’s plenty of people reading without engaging who will be influenced in small but meaningful ways. You’re planting good seeds.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Thank you, I appreciate it! I do it more for others than the people I directly interact with, who have largely made up their mind already. That’s generally my strategy, people looking to argue online aren’t going to change their minds, they see it as a “win/lose” situation. Instead, I focus on refutation of absurd claims and well-sourced information more for onlookers to engage with. I really like Nia Frome’s articles on Red Sails called Marketing Socialism and On Dialectics, Or How to Defeat Enemies. They really help shape how I engage with others online, decisive and sharp refutation is very useful for onlookers to see.

              For more fun articles on why people believe what they do, I’m a big fan of Roderic Day’s “Brainwashing” and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing.” Those help dramatically with seeing that, really, there’s little convincing others directly in online debate, but there is hope for others whose material conditions have opened them up to new ideas to see and engage with more information they are curious about.

  • Catpain Typo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Capitalism breeds fascism. As long as we have capitalism we will fight fascism. Communism is not the answer though nor is any extreme ideology. Social direct democracy or even sociocracy would be better systems.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Social Democracy retains Private Ownership as the principle aspect of its economy, ergo its still Capitalist. Fascism isn’t distinct from Capitalism, but Capitalism in certain circumstances, ie when it needs to put on a mask and brutally protect itself from its own decay, before taking off the mask and pretending it’s something else, ie it keeps Capitalism’s record “clean.”

      Further, being radical does not equal being wrong. Distance from the status quo does not mean it is not correct, we need to judge legitimately the merits of Socialism/Communism and not just say they are too radical.

      • Catpain Typo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Not necessarily. A true sociocracy would value corporations on a system of social good. Not, as now, a measure of how much spare money it has after trade and costs. It should also be very possible to run corporations as co-operatives which spread ownership among the workers.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          Unless the Proletariat has control of the state, and thus can implement a “corporation behavior credit score” like in the PRC that isn’t in control of private interests, you will see corporations just lobby and get what they want that way. Socialism remains necessary, which is the first step to Communism.

          Secondly, cooperative ownership is nice, but it doesn’t stop the natural centralizing of markets or prove more efficient than public ownership and planning at higher levels of development.

          Really, it sounds like you would like the PRC’s model of economy. Companies like Huawei are worker-owned, the Proletariat has control over the state and thus profit isn’t the central guiding factor of the economy, and there are checks in place to punish corporations that go against benchmarks and metrics for “good” vs “bad” behavior.

          This is the “extreme ideology” you said doesn’t work.

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      nor is any extreme ideology. Social direct democracy

      Whoah hold it right there, that’s democratic extremism! You’re taking away all the representatives of bribery and extortion. Best to leave a few weak points, for balance.

  • thedruid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    Because at then end ,power over the people is given to the state. When you give the state the means of production and that state falls under the sway of humans with power, you get corruption and death.

    Once a place has enough people, anonymity happens. We stop knowing our neighbors and leaders. We don’t see the corruption they can now hide. Communism gives an easier way to leverage that corruption and power more easily

    Socialism, more specifically forms of democratic socialism ( and with today’s tech it can be one vite one person), is far more scalable and stable

    We need a new constitution with more power given to the people and LESS to the state

  • Mark12870@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    It is terrible to see so many comments here celebrating communism. Communists were ruining our country (Czechia) for over 40 years and led it to economical collapse. When we tried to reform the regime in 1968, the Russians invaded to stop it. Communism doesn’t really work, and it has already been proven.

    Also, I have to say the country worked in a bizzare way. The government robbed everyone of their property, so in return, people were stealing from public supplies.

    So please try to study something first about communism in Eastern Europe before you start to celebrare this regime.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          The vast majority believe they are worse off now than under Socialism, which makes sense because the reintroduction of Capitalism resulted in skyrocketing rates of poverty, prostitution, drug abuse, homelessness, and an estimated 7 million excess deaths around the world.

          • lost_screwdriver@thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            I guess you can say Ukraine is now worse off than in the USSR, Back then they weren’t at war. The current situation isn’t exactly the fault of capitalism (or Ukranie for that matter)

              • SugaredScoundrel@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                15 days ago

                Private interests do align, but rarely. Meaning you have more chance at opposing narratives forming. Public is monovoiced. Without an opposing voice its data becomes suspect.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  Private is controlled by large corporations, and often gets state funding. All press has bias. Really, you don’t have anything against the data other than you feel like it could be wrong.

              • cotlovan@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                15 days ago

                Oh my fing god, I thought lemmy is only full of extreme liberals, but it’s also full of wannabe comunists. Dude, have you ever asked yourself why USSR fell if everything was better than in the west? Why people risked their lives jumping over the Berlin wall? Why there was a whole black market of importing goods from the west into ussr? Why people didn’t enjoy being sent to Siberia by the millions to die of hunger and of forced labor?

                Or was Cuba a success?

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  Lemmy is developed by Communists, the Communists were here first.

                  Secondly, the dissolution of the USSR was driven instead by numerous complex factors:

                  1. Liberal reforms that gave the Bourgeoisie power over key industries

                  2. A firm dedication to planning by hand even as the economy grew more complex and computers too slow to be adapted to the planning mechanisms

                  3. A huge portion of resources were spent on maintaining millitary parity with the US in order to dissuade US invasion

                  4. 80% of the combat done in World War II was on the Eastern Front, and 20 million Soviets lost their lives, with no real economic support from the West in rebuilding despite taking the largest cost of war

                  5. An enclosed, heavily sanctioned economy relied on internal resource gathering, closed off from the world market

                  Countries like the PRC have taken to heart what happened in the USSR. As an example, the PRC shifted to a more classically Marxist economy, focusing on public ownership of only the large firms and key industries, and relying on markets to develop out of private ownership. This keeps them in touch with the global economy without giving the bourgeoisie control of key industries, and thus the bourgeoisie has no power over the economy or the state.

                  People left the DDR after getting good educations for free, and higher wages in West Germany. They got the best of both worlds.

                  Millions were not sent to Siberia.

                  Cuba is a resilliant success story given its brutal embargo and sanctions, yes. It has astounding metrics in areas like life expectancy despite being intentionally impoverished by the US Empire.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          That’s not how AES states function, in any capacity. Further, people get paid in Socialist states, so I really don’t know what strawman you’re fighting here.

      • Ibuthyr@lemmy.wtf
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        Ever seen Communism working as intended? There’ll always be power hungry assholes ruining these things for everyone.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          I’d say all AES states have broadly managed to achieve their goals. There have been troubles and struggles faced internally and externally, none have been dreamlike utopian wonderlands, but seemingly only non-Marxists are the ones that require that of Marxist movements.

          • Ibuthyr@lemmy.wtf
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            15 days ago

            I had to google that first. Had no idea what the sahel states had to do with socialism or communism.

            Those AES states are mostly highly corrupt though. I wouldn’t refer to north Korea as a livable place, plus the leaders are bathing in money while the populace dies from hunger. In Vietnam, if you know someone in politics, you can get whatever you want. I know this (nearly) first-hand. Laos, lol. And why the hell is China on that list? They’re way too deep in the capitalist game to be on that list, no? People also don’t mean shit to the ones in charge. Their people are executed by the thousands every year and they like to keep minorities in concentration camps. I’m sorry, those states are failed states in my opinion.

            And as long as there is corruption, communism is not going to work. It’s a nice theory, but it just takes one black sheep to fuck it up for everyone. I wish it weren’t that way. It’d be nice to live in a world where people work for a purpose and everyone gets the same and no one has to suffer. Not going to happen.

            Capitalism is plain evil though, I’ll give you that.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              15 days ago

              AES as in “Actually Existing Socialism.” The Sahel States are a quasi-Socialist national liberatory alliance. Burkina Faso was briefly Socialist under Sankara, but that time has passed.

              The struggles faced in the DPRK are more due to sanctions and embargo than anything else, kinda like Cuba. Unlike Cuba, the US slaughtered 20% of their population and destroyed 80% of their buildings, yet they were economically ahead of South Korea until the 80s. The leadership is not “bathing in money” either.

              Vietnam is rising rapidly. It isn’t a Utopia, but is dramatically improving. Same with Laos.

              The PRC is more classically Marxist than they were under the late Mao period and Gang of Four, I elaborated on that, here. Further, you’re repeating state department propaganda about them, very silly.

              Further, China is democratic. It doesn’t have a western liberal democracy, but it does have a comprehensive Socialist democracy. You can read this article talking about why the Chinese democratic model is in place and why the people support it, or this article on how the Chinese model of democracy works in contrast to western democracy, or this short video on how it works, or this video on how elections work, or this article on the makeup of the NPC.

              By what metrics is China not democratic? What mechanically would they have to change for you to accept the opinions of the Chinese citizenry on their own system? I recommend this introduction to SWCC, it goes in-detail about how elections and the democratic model work in China. what mechanically would China have to change in order for you to accept the system that the Chinese have implemented by and for themselves, and approve of at rates exceeding 90%?

              Please explain how “one black sheep” would ruin Socialism/Communism. Given that you clearly aren’t familiar with Marxist theory nor how AES states function, this is a telltale sign that your critiques are of strawmen.

        • Scott_of_the_Arctic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          TBF Russia is a shit hole and has failed in every type of government they’ve ever had. Honestly it’s probably worse in Russia now than under communism. China was also doing no better before “communism”. Basically countries tend to make the jump when they have nothing left to lose.

          • KimBongUn420@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            Russia is a shit hole and has failed in every type of government they’ve ever had.

            The soviets found themselves in a feudal shithole, and elevated it to a global super power.

            China was also doing no better before “communism”.

            Not sure who claims that China is communist, but it’s definitely not the chines. They have a market socialist system (or more accurately SWCC), which still has class society and its own contradictions.

            Educate yourself on basic facts before you speak on a topic and stfu until you do so shitlib

  • oyzmo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Socialism allows for both public and private ownership, individual freedoms, and democratic decision-making, while still aiming for social equality. Communism, in contrast, tends to involve total state control and often limits personal freedoms.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      Tell me you’ve never read anything about communism that wasn’t written by anti-communists without telling me you’ve never read anything about communism that wasn’t written by anti-communists.

    • m532@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Limits personal freedoms only for the owning class. If you’re not a landlord or ceo you have nothing to fear.

      • Liberteez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        Tell that to the masses Lenin, Stalin, and Mao killed

        I support communes, and Anarcho communism sounds lovely. Once authority is involved, they tend to fail

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlBanned
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          How are you going to secure your commune from external enemies without invoking authority?

        • m532@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          Yeah I didn’t consider the nazis but they are just lackeys for the landlords and ceos so I mentally put them in there. Ofc nazis have to fear communism too.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          The Black Book of Communism was debunked long ago, from including Nazis killed during World War II as “victims of Communism” to literally making up numbers to get to 100 million dead to being outright disproven once the Soviet Archives were opened up.

          There were excess deaths, but Communist leaders weren’t mindless butchers, either. And with the introduction of Socialism came numerous benefits for the working class, like a doubling of life expectancy, tripling of literacy rates to 99.9%, free and high quality education, healthcare, and childcare, an expansion in women’s rights, a democratization of the economy, and much more.

          Anarchism is a beautiful idea, and I used to be one. However, I am more convinced of Marxism, namely because we have more data that shows the success of Marxism, and because hierarchy and centralization are requirements for expansive infrastructure projects like high speed rail and for complex production, such as for smartphones.

          I have an introductory Marxist-Leninist Reading List you can check out, if you’d like to learn more.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Both Capitalism and Socialism have room for public and private ownership, the difference is which sector controls the state, large firms, and key industries. The Nordic Countries are dominated by Private Capital, ie it is Capitalist, while the PRC is dominated by Public Ownership, ie it is Socialist.

      Communism limits the personal freedoms of the bourgeoisie. All Communism is, is a mkre developed and global form of Socialism, where the small firms that once were private have all grown into the public sector or collapsed.

  • Grimel@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Ah yes, get rid of extremism with different extremism. I think we’ve been there already. Spoiler: Didnt work.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      First, a societal organization outside the Western norm has no bearing on if it will be successful or not. The “middle” has no superior intrinsic characteristics.

      Second, we know Socialism works, the PRC is now becoming the de facto world power as the US falls, all while providing dramatic improvements for its people and increasing levels of satisfaction.

      What, specifically, doesn’t work?

      • Grimel@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Extremism is “the quality or state of being extreme” or “the advocacy of extreme measures or views”.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremism

        Or as i know it with these regimes both left or right: those that oppose and do not belive in our thing must be gotten rid of. I would say that is the extreme here to me. Thats what both communists and nazis did in Europe, in my country, in my city. And i want none of it to come back. Iam honestly terrified where is this world headding again.

        But if you want to take a deeper look, this seems interesting if you have access:

        https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-83336-7_2

        https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-political-extremist-1857297

        • m532@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          Ah so you’re an imperialist

          I myself consider imperialists to be extremists, their global oppression is certainly very extreme

          Communists just want to have the fruits of their labor not be stolen, very normal

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          The portrayal of the Communists and Nazis as “twin evils” exaggerates the sins of the Communists in quantity and quality, while minimizing the sins of the Nazis in quantity and quality, in order to show them as relatively equal problems. In other words, its Nazi apologia, and historical revisionism. Read Blackshirts and Reds.

          The Nazis executed the Communists, Socialists, gay people, trans people, disabled people, Jewish people, Slavic people, and many, many more. It wasn’t simple opposition, it was a racially supremacist ideology.

          The Communists executed Tsarists, fascists, and terrorists to the state. They did not create a systematic industrialized murder machine like the Nazis did in order to keep up with how many people they needed to kill.

          • Grimel@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            I can agree with you in some parts. They did not have any industrialized murder machine. But they mass murdered Polish by bullet, Ukrainians by starvation for example.

            Communists imprisoned and/or sent to forced labor people for being gay, religious (not only jews) and yes “terrorists to the state” which in most of the time meant someone just spoke against regime. And well being a prisoner in Communist countries meant you were treated almost like jew in a nazi camp just without killing part sometimes.

            All that said by my opinion communism wasnt racially supremacist ideology. It was just supremacist ideology. All they cared about was how great the state is and everything else is not.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              15 days ago

              They did not mass murder the Polish, nor did they intentionally starve Ukrainians. Both of those claims are highly inaccurate, the Nazis exterminated the Polish and the 1930s famine was unintended and tragic.

              Further, your claims about the prison system are highly distorted in quantity and quality, they in no way compared to the industrial mass murder machines in Nazi Germany. Read Russian Justice.

              Communism is about uplifting the working class, not worship of the state.

  • random@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    “capitalism is evil”

    so what’s not evil?

    “a totalitarian socialist shithole, where you got no freedom or human rights”

    • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      A river floods every year. If someone builds a house next to it and the river takes it, is the river evil, or is the person suffering the consequences of their own ignorance? The consequences of capitalism are predictable and inevitable. The behaviour of a dollar is almost as predictable as that of an electron. Why do people pretend like we don’t know what is going to happen?

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          what a cowardly thing to say. you could have just walked away, but your fragile ego wasn’t done humiliating you.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          You don’t really have free speech in Capitalism, all of the important media is entirely controlled by private interests to begin with. Further, with what freedoms we do have, why deliberately plug your ears? Do you just want the freedom to ignore inconvenient truths?

        • krolden@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          What the fuck is up with you people its like you only want to cry about the scary thing you’re so afraid of but won’t read anything about how it may not be so scary

          You’re like a child who won’t eat their peas because they are green.

  • eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Maaaaaaybe the USSR isn’t the best example of a better society we want to be building.

    I’m watching the whole ideological-purge thing happen in the US and it kinda sucks.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Either build something better or shutup, I say. Unless you’re a big fan of Tsarist Russia

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlBanned
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 days ago

              The whole point was that I don’t reject successful revolutions while not having achieved anything myself. That’s you dog.

              • Lightor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                12 days ago

                I never rejected anything, maybe try reading again and this time not just seeing what you want. And what was successful before doesn’t mean it will be successful today. People just don’t understand context or nuance. That’s you dog.

                • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlBanned
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  12 days ago

                  Ok, if you’re just going to lie about easily verified things in a discussion only the two of us are going to see, there’s really no point in having it.

      • rational_lib@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        I’ve played civilization and I’m pretty sure there’s other forms of government besides Communism and Monarchy that have low corruption, albeit lacking the ability to force the citizens into war on the leader’s whim.

        • m532@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          Isnt civilization the game where “democracy” has 0 corruption? I think its kinda biased and not exactly based on reality

        • CalipherJones@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          Corruption is a matter of individuals rather than the form of government. Any human system is bound to be corruptible since it involves humans.

          I think a strong anti corruption culture is the best defense against it.

    • ptee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      Both extremes on display those examples, seems like they both end up in the same place in the end. Maybe it would be reasonable to use any system that is a mix of things, instead of focusing on pure capitalism or communism.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        There’s really no such thing as a pure system, any mix is still going to have either the public sector as principle or private, ie which controls the state, large firms, and key industries. There’s no way to keep them “balanced,” one will have power over the other, and its best for it to be the public sector.