Skip Navigation

Posts
9
Comments
180
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • That Democracy can be an effective check on Capitalism. Liberalism is my favorite fairy tale. If all the propaganda I was fed as a kid in the 90s was actually true, I'd be in paradise.

  • Sure, I'll agree with that. Liberalism, despite being fundamentally right wing, is definitely not the furthest right economic system or social philosophy. The only thing about it is that many of those countries existing in that state (or were made into countries at all) exist in the context of global white supremacist capitalist hegemony (AKA "The West" or "The Global North") and would not exist in their current forms without the West installing figureheads and funding conflicts to loot their natural resources, so I would argue that many of these neo-colonies are still capitalist without any of the benefits of hosting the capitalists.

    For example, whatever government existed in India under the British Mandate, they existed in a Capitalist system which exclusively benefitted the British. Millions died of famine not because of India, but because of Britain.

  • I can't see how the left wing being oriented to progress and equality would mean that capitalism and oligarchy would fit that. Could you explain your thinking?

  • Weird. Our US government would consider it anti-semitic not to use a nazi salute twice on stage in front of millions of people. I wonder which government is serious about protecting their Jewish citizens?

  • Pretty simple. If they've equipped everyone to the point where they're mostly not needed but their people are relieved to see them instead of nervous to see them, then they are an excellent manager.

  • This is not a difference of opinion, it's a difference of the commonly understood meaning of words.

    Very straightforwardly from the Encyclopedia Britannica website:

    Capitalism is a widely adopted economic system in which there is private ownership of the means of production. Modern capitalist systems usually include a market-oriented economy, in which the production and pricing of goods, as well as the income of individuals, are dictated to a greater extent by market forces resulting from interactions between private businesses and individuals than by central planning undertaken by a government or local institution. Capitalism is built on the concepts of private property, profit motive, and market competition.

    As for Socialism:

    System of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control; also, the political movements aimed at putting that system into practice. Because “social control” may be interpreted in widely diverging ways, socialism ranges from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal.

  • They aren't. Right wing is oriented to tradition and hierarchy while left wing is oriented to progress and equality. This has been understood since the concept originated during the French Revolution.

  • Capitalism is not defined by free trade. Capitalism is defined by the ownership of the means of production. Capitalism is a system in which Capitalists, or investors, own the means of production while they purchase labor from workers to operate the means of production on their behalf. Socialism is a system in which the workers themselves own the means of production. Free trade may exist in either system.

  • Thank you for taking my request in good faith; this is what I was looking for. I'll be taking some time to look through these.

  • What you claimed is very believable to me, and I'm also prepared to believe that the reality of your claims is heavily censored in the English language. That being said I haven't been able to find evidence to support that the primary drivers of these respective uprisings were fascist or Western. I have only found evidence of other causes. I have no doubt opportunistic fascists and Western governments took advantage of these situations for their own benefit, but the origins of these situations seem to have been genuine domestic issues which were met with state violence causing the situation to escalate. Would you link me to your sources?

  • From Wikipedia:

    The term "tankie" was originally used by dissident Marxist–Leninists to describe members of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) who followed the party line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). Specifically, it was used to distinguish party members who spoke out in defence of the Soviet use of tanks to suppress the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and the 1968 Prague Spring, or who more broadly adhered to pro-Soviet positions.

    I've never understood why there is any confusion over the word "tankie." It applies to the pro-cop left. If a leftist believes that it's necessary for cops to beat minorities and dissidents into submission for their society to function, they're tankies. If they approach leftism in a way that does not involve state violence against civilians to enforce those ideas, they're not tankies. To me there isn't a lot of gray area.

  • Something I've had to accept over the course of my life is that the vast majority of humans will passively accept anything as long as they feel like there's something they can do to not be killed. Only when it feels out of control whether they might be killed will the majority of people feel the need to act and no sooner. There has never been any changing this. Fortunately the vast majority of people are not needed to affect positive change. People who care need to set the tone and followers will follow as they do. Your efforts would be better served among people actively resisting or building structures that benefit people.

  • This being an open-source application made me wonder about this exactly. Thanks for running it and publishing your results. This is fascinating.

  • We'll be a few decades into the new dark ages and a few centuries away from restoring any kind of democracy anywhere on earth. For reasons beyond my understanding, the vast majority of people will be perfectly happy with whatever happens so it's not worth worrying about.

  • ADHD. My mind is racing at all times for my entire life no matter what. Probably every person with ADHD ends up thinking more than a few things which are completely original because the sheer volume of involuntary thoughts which are so cognitively specific to that person and nonsense to everyone else.

  • Yes, it is a Tiktok meme. A few may actually remain on Xiaohongshu but probably most will migrate to whatever logical replacement pops up.

  • It is a protest. Some Americans may ultimately remain on "Little Red Book" but the main purpose of making it the #1 app in the US was to spite the government. It's a much more restrictive app than Tiktok, but people are enjoying talking to foreign nationals both ways.

  • Because of the nature of the algorithm, it absolutely is this for plenty of people. It's also not the case for plenty of people. I doubt there are many right-wingers going on to join a Chinese app called "Little Red Book" which has rules that require the promotion of Chinese socialism. It's the most popular app in the US now because of this ban.

  • "Contrary to popular belief..."