top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 83 points 1 week ago (37 children)

Most governments with the Communist in the name, are just state run capitalists

  • source
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 week ago (28 children)

    Yes... China is state capitalist... Meanwhile, here in the Burger Reich, corporations routinely get bailouts from Uncle Sam paid for by the taxes of the workers.

    If China is State Capitalist, what do you consider the USA?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Fake communist societies being state capitalists doesn't preclude other societies from being state capitalist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    Yeah, if the response to "this system doesn't work" is "neither does yours" then we agree that neither system works, and need to find one that does. And if no system will ever work, we need to find some way to live safely and securely without systems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 week ago* (1 child)

    And if no system will ever work, we need to find some way to live safely and securely without systems.

    one just has to look to anthropology, we know what works, the Khalari Bushmen lasted 100,000 years, The Australian Aborigine lasted 60,000 gears, we won't last another 50.

    We won't go back voluntarily but we will go back

    for example

    https://aeon.co/essays/why-inequality-bothers-people-more-than-poverty

    Up until then, it was widely believed that hunter-gatherers endured a near-constant battle against starvation, and that it was only with the advent of agriculture that we began to free ourselves from the capricious tyranny of nature.

    When in 1964 a young Canadian anthropologist, Richard Borshay Lee, conducted a series of simple economic input/output analyses of the Ju/’hoansi as they went about their daily lives, he revealed that not only did they make a good living from hunting and gathering, but that they were also well-nourished and content. Most remarkably, his research revealed that the Ju/’hoansi managed this on the basis of little more than 15 hours’ work per week. On the strength of this finding, the anthropologist Marshall Salinas in Stone Age Economics (1972) renamed hunter-gatherers ‘the original affluent society’.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago

    If China is State Capitalist, what do you consider the USA?

    State capitalist with no tooth. The enemy of your enemy isn't always your friend, stop defending the bad of the other camp just because you hate the bad from this camp.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (7 replies)
    [–] 36 points 1 week ago (38 children)

    Communism promised abolishing classes, but failed.

    Capitalism promised protecting the elite class above all else, and succeeded.

  • source
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago (37 children)

    This is a fundamental misunderstanding of Marxism. While a communist society is indeed classless, it can only be achieved when there is no need for a state to defend the people from capitalist reaction, ie when communism is the globally dominant system. Until then, communist counties practice socialism, where the state is controlled by the working class, with the goal of increasing global worker power and eventually achieving the conditions where communism can exist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • load more comments (37 replies)
  • [–] 27 points 1 week ago

    Its so obvious when progressive candidates are starting to get momentum. We immediately get back to the red scare except this time with a nice helping of Islamophobia sprinkled on. The playbook is exhausting...

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    We are a deeply unserious joke of a nation.

    Change my mind.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 20 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    Seems like that is the end state of any kind of system. Has to be torn down every once in awhile.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 week ago

    You see, in Capitalist America, man oppresses man. In Soviet Union it is the other way around.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 week ago

    The Republicans seem to be stumbling around helplessly trying to explain why they should get votes, but they keep using descriptions that could be turned around on them.

    I'm thinking of Vance's comment at President Pedo's, circle-jerk-a-thon:

    "The contrast in this election, ladies and gentlemen, it's not about this or that policy. It's about the party of common sense vs the party of the crazies."

    He's 100% correct there.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

    Helen Cox Richardson notes that accusation of socialism have been levied by the owner class as far back is the antebellum plantations, arguing the working class are not stakeholders and even basic infrastructure such as roads, schools and libraries were blasphemous.

    The red scare started as early as Wilson, as soon as the Red Army beat the White. Wilson petitioned the league of nations to embargo the USSR simply because the ideology was a threat to capital driven industry.

    I think the US public needs to deliberate if our intention is to be a public-serving government that holds everyone equal under law and values human rights over property rights. Or, if our intentions are for something else.

    Right now the federal government is captured by a movement that does the opposite, with a propaganda machine propping up pro-business (anti-person) ideology, using socialism and communism as scare words.

    We're seeing the end result of this as corporations have captured regulatory bodies, they are left to govern themselves as top-down feifdoms, and the working class is left choking on data center fumes, monitored by mass surveillance and unable to afford fuel and food at the same time.

    (We're also seeing the US state, representing the US public to the international community, getting played by its national rivals, and our military misused and abused.)

    Even when it benefits businesses to support the working class (and increase productivity, therefore profitability) businesses fall down, driven by the owner class' pure resentment of their own workforce. (This is what drives the AI dream of full automation.) To business, the economy is for them, and if they can shut out the workforce to languish on their own and starve, no sleep will be lost over the tragedy.

    So the people of the US, if they don't want this outcome, need to consciously and deliberately choose to create a society that serves the people unconditionally in favor of the businesses. The public-serving infrastructure, the social safety nets, the investment into education and liberal arts, the clear establishment and enforcement of civil rights, the regulatory institutions that protect workers and consumers from the neglect and antagonism of the owner class, all follow naturally.

    And that said, it means we are going to have to take business influence on government and excess hoarding of wealth extremely seriously.

    And the end result may look a lot like socialism or communism, whether or not we're working towards adopting either specific ideology.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 10 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    No matter the political or economic system, what is to be avoided is the concentration of power, both "soft" and "hard". Alas, I'm more convinced than ever before that this is a feature of homo sapiens, and not a bug.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

    I agree that social hierarchies are a feature of homo sapiens, hence why any good form of governance should be based on restricting our worst instincts. That's what the original liberalism improved with the separation of political power into executive, legislative, and judicate branches. Unfortunately, the same was not done for economic power, which - most liberal democracies - allowed to keep concentrating with few to no safeguards.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago

    Distributism is interesting on this front I think, it's sceptical of power and wealth being concentrated by anyone public or private and instead advocates widespread ownership of the means of production.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (3 replies)

    WRONG.

    In Magastan there are NOT two classes. There's just rich people and some subset of human waste that apparently think of themselves as people with rights (that doesn't make them people in the eyes of the only class existing there).

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago (29 children)

    And then you wonder why Trump won...

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (28 children)

    I'm curious as to why you think he won.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (21 children)

    He won because his promises were better aligned with voter demands. In short: Dems neglected large part of voters and he simply targeted that neglected population.

    You can be cynical and say he was a better liar. Which is fair, but truth doesn't really matter in this race. It's all about promises and appearences.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • load more comments (17 replies)
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    I don't like communism. I don't like capitalism. I don't give a fuck about your petty squabbles and philisophical debates.

    But I do find the imbalance of wealth power concerning and I'm supporting whoever will do something against it.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    Under Communism, Man exploits Man, but under Capitalism it's the other way around!

    (Sorry, I'll return this joke to the museum now)

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    It's horrific, but also amusing in its own way: So many people in the USA think socialism and communism are the same thing and use them interchangeably. It's also amusing that the administration and party that's "fighting" so hard to drum up another communism scare because of the DSA and a push for single-payer healthcare is also promising everyone a $5,000 check ... just because -- free money!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (14 children)

    It's two sides of the same coin.

    Anarchism is the best solution for everyone but i think this is only feasible in a planet where everyone shares the same values, customs and norms. To allow mutual trust and respect not to pilfer and attack each other. The best example is in Dune with the Fremens. Each communities still have local quirks and there is slight cultural differences between the Northerners and Southerners but they all aid each other and identify as one people. The threat is from outside Arakkis. So, even anarchist values would have to extend universal wide for anarchism proper to work.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • load more comments (14 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›