CapriciousDay

joined 2 months ago
[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 9 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

I've come around to the idea that ultimately socialist countries live under constant pressure from capitalists to collapse, from birth. Thinking about the history of the USSR in particular, it went from counterrevolution, to WW2/Nazi invasion to open US backed sabotage with very little breathing room.

The birth of liberal nations was also messy. The US started with probably the largest genocide, that of native Americans, in known history. Revolutionary France was no picnic either.

On the other side of the coin, lib socialists/anarchists have unfortunately been crushed by their neighbours repeatedly. Thinking about the Paris commune, revolutionary Catalonia, etc. I think we would all love to live in a world of nothing but love and peace, but there are bad, selfish guys out there who will smoosh your utopia in a heartbeat.

This ends up necessitating some degree of authoritarianism as a self-defense mechanism.

We are now being presented with the reality: that it was never a choice between peaceful exploitation under capitalism and idealistic but authoritarian socialism, just that the capitalists were biding their time and building support for just long enough to make it seem like a viable driver of increased living standards. The capitalists are done with worker power and are bringing down the hammer. They are bored and want us to war again.

The Soviets were accused of creating Potemkin villages, the capitalists created entire Potemkin "service economies" that barely produce anything, funded/enabled by historical imperial wealth and power dynamics.

We are then presented with a choice, do we want working people to be in charge? Or do we want to let the wealthy treat us like their property?

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 8 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

They don't have to be new or good. Or recently washed.

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 7 points 23 hours ago

Crohn's here. You would not believe what my body can produce. The other side of it as well is when you really need to go, and somebody has thoroughly destroyed the only available cubicle(s). I once just walked out the state of the loos was so bad. It's ok to touch the toilet brush to sort out your own stuff people 😭

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah I think the main driver is neoliberal austerity doing what it does. The wing of the party in charge are basically Thatcherites. They want to the market to decide who gets access to basic necessities and bureaucracy to decide anything else.

In general I think neoliberals are becoming embarrassed by the fact that evidence based medicine is increasingly at odds with capitalistic ideals around how workforces should comply with the rich. So they want to introduce an apparently technocratic (which will inevitably be as low skilled tickbox bureaucratic as you like) body to replace actually qualified people - doctors- in this area.

I think it's also a bit of a reaction to changes in the geopolitical scene. They're hoping that in the event of further war in Europe that desperate but physically able people will be coerced into the military. By taking the ability to decide who is sick out of the hands of doctors and into the state they make this a lot easier. Similarly, more money for manpower and munitions by not paying out in benefits.

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

A few thoughts: we're not that poor, a lot of the current distribution of wealth and government spending aims are the result of neoliberal ideology first and foremost.

That said our nominal GDP growth has been harmed by neoliberal policies which have shifted the UK away from producing very much and towards playing many silly games with money. We measure how much we move abstract representations of currency around (which usually represents some probabilistic measure of value of money, which in itself is really just numbers with no intrinsic value) and go "hey, great job, we've really grown the economy!"

We saw the financial crisis in 2008 and apparently thought to ourselves "let's have some more of that".

So we're in a situation where our overseers are seeing our GDP failing to grow as it should, panicking, and implementing more of the same policies that cause that situation in the first place. The UK isn't poor yet but it will be soon. The young and the poor are the ones who are feeling the bleeding edge of this trend but it's filtering through to the middle class now as well.

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

For-profit US tech boycott club!

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yeah it's sort of shitty but by the looks of it she was talking directly to them

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago

I'd love to say Starmer was merely spineless, but he had plenty of spine standing up to left wing members of the Labour party. It's pretty clear his allegiance is to the US and its idea of a global order, no matter what form that takes.

Starmer represents the insidious ingress of US fascism, paving the way for Reform.

 

Taking the ability of GPs to write sick notes away will be massively counter productive. For one thing, sick notes actually preserve many people's jobs, giving them the time and energy to recuperate. Pushing sick people down a bureaucratic nightmare when they're already sick is going to be counterproductive, not to mention the taxpayer money that will be thrown away to a private operator to administrate this. This will end up with people's careers being terminated for things that the current system lets you recover from.

The ideology around this is clear when you consider the government's focus on getting people with long term mental health conditions into work, apparently without doing anything to improve mental health support. They state they want business to "support mental health" and we all know what that looks like: an e-learning module nobody will pay attention, some nice posters to and maybe a mental health support line with no power to actually support you in anything.

But that's not to forget the real root cause of these issues: young people falling into despair as they realise that even if they do spend most of their waking lives working, they will still not be able to afford their own housing and bills. They will still end up chased by debt collectors. They will still live miserably.

Many of the profits collected by the companies people in the UK will work for, today, will end up going into the hands of the companies of fascist America. Too many roles are frivolous profit making activities or serving shallow whims. There is no pride to be had in many of the working opportunities in the UK.

Any honest review into this situation will reveal this reality as the key driver behind the situation.

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

To understand this you need to understand the theory. Marx outlined that socialism and communism each had to be transitioned to after reaching a given level of social/economic development. In particular there is the notion of "withering away of the state" which would happen after a global revolution, which is the aim of this classless/moniless society they outlined.

The communist manifesto is a short read!

In fact the USSR implemented explicit market policies, a sort of contained capitalism, which was designed to facilitate reaching the necessary preconditions for socialism and communism. Essentially all of the "communist" states we've seen so far have been some play on the notion of just "socialism in one country" in the Marxist-Leninist version of communist parties, who have/had the goal of eventually reaching communism.

What's probably most interesting is that the idea behind the USSR wasn't initially to have the state direct everything from the top, but in fact to facilitate worker councils (soviets) to direct their workplaces.

But you have to remember this all happened in the context of a state which had recently undergone a revolution, was rife with counterrevolutonary action (see revolutionary France and civil war Britain to see how this played out during the birth of liberalism) and was then plunged into WW2 where most states involved were acting fairly dictatorially for the duration of it. Followed shortly by the US making it an explicit goal to prevent world communism through e.g. CIA intervention because they feared "domino theory"

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 24 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Fascism on the rise? Better get their list making and person finding mechanisms sorted out for them in advance.

-liberals everywhere

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's more like, a blog is a personal thing. Using some off the shelf solutions removes that sense of personality to me I guess. It kind of makes the act of publishing the post feel like I've cheated somehow, when, all I'm really doing is putting text on the internet and I'm perfectly capable of doing that myself from a technical POV.

I get this with game dev as well, I'm much happier with games where I feel like I've worked with lower level tooling than a pre made engine. Sort of a personal not made here syndrome thing I suppose.

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I've had a few hosted ones but I kind of hate them. I think I'll build and self host a solution at some point because I just like things that I've made myself better.

 

Or maybe a catchier name would be a "basic human decency GPL extension"

I can't help but notice that organisations constantly co-opt free software which was developed with the intent to promote freedom, use it to spread hate and ideas which will ultimately infringe on freedom for many.

The fact that hateful people who use such software may then go on to use it to promote or otherwise support fascism which prevents others from enjoying the software in the way it was imagined, is one potential manifestation of the paradox of tolerance in this respect. I think this is particularly true for e.g. social media platforms and the fediverse.

My proposal to combat this would be the introduction of a "paradox of tolerance" license which says that organisations which use the software must enforce a bare-minimum set of rules to combat intolerance. So anti-racism, anti-homophobia, anti-transphobia, etc. The idea is then to make overtly hateful organisations legally liable for the use of the software through the incompatibility of the requirements with their hateful belief system.

This could be an extension to GPL and AGPL where the license must be replicated in modified versions of the software, thereby creating virality with these rules.

Is this a thing already? I understand OS and FOSS have historically had a thing for political neutrality but are we not starting to find the faults with this now?

view more: next ›