404
Abolish capitalism (lemmy.world)
all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 40 points 1 year ago
[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 year ago

Nah, it's just filled with PR speak to make it look like there's ethics when asked

[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 1 year ago

Reforms to restrain the rent-seeking class were always an alternative to the preferred method of killing them and redistributing their wealth.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 23 points 1 year ago

She's right, but given our situation this misses the point. The ruling class wants you to think reforms are a "replacement" to revolution, but we don't need to accept that premise. Reforms weaken the ruling class, otherwise they would already be enacted. So I ask, por que dos?

[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago
[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 year ago

relevant quote

The revolutionary struggle is the very antithesis of the parliamentary struggle. In Germany, for four decades we had nothing but parliamentary “victories.” We practically walked from victory to victory. And when faced with the great historical test of August 4, 1914, the result was the devastating political and moral defeat, an outrageous debacle and rot without parallel. To date, revolutions have given us nothing but defeats. Yet these unavoidable defeats pile up guarantee upon guarantee of the future final victory.

from "Order Prevails in Berlin" by Rosa Luxembourg

[-] buzz86us@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Abolish US crony capitalism.

[-] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

You can just say capitalism

[-] buzz86us@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Except it isn't companies are colluding on pricing which drives up prices for the consumer. And Chinese import tariffs are artificially inflating the price of vehicles.

I was taught that capitalism is about fair competition for consumers, and that really hasn't been the case.

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 17 points 1 year ago

Capitalism will never be fair because it requires infinite growth in a finite world at all costs.

[-] Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Infinite growth AND a perfect competition environment. Neither things is achievable, let alone sustainable.

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yep. It’s absolutely not sustainable in any form. That’s what people don’t realize. It’s why we’re seeing enshittification of everything now. Companies are hitting a ceiling where innovation stalls but they’re still required to grow regardless. So they resort to essentially slowly burning down their own house and shitting where they eat. Marx and others predicted this ages ago and now we’re seeing it play out in real time.

The problem with capitalism is that we have one giant bucket for companies to pull from and none of those companies give a flying fuck about the bucket itself. So they keep taking from it collectively. Eventually the bucket will be empty and none of them will be held responsible. This is exactly why we had the Great Depression and the 2008 housing market crash. The capitalists redlined every engine until they were non-functioning. Now the working class is forced to clean up the mess, while facing the repercussions of it all.

It’s not even a hard thing to comprehend. This is how parasites work. They drain the host until it’s either dead or useless to them, then they move to a new host. The problem is that earth is the host and unless capitalists figure out how to start space mining, we’re all fucked. Because, again, they continue to take resources while taking no responsibility.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

This is Capitalism still.

Capitalism itself doesn't care what consumers want, you're referring to Liberalism the ideology.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find any example of capitalism ever being anything different, in terms of collusion and gouging.

The idea that it could ever be even remotely fair, let alone competitive, is more utopian than anything you'll see in post-structural socialism.

[-] Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The thing is, while inflation is actually going down, prices are not, simply because corporations decided to keep them high. We have had the data to prove this for a while, and we are now getting corporations admitting to it. So if none of them have decided to work against this, to compete, as it would be a shoe-in to take some of the other corps' customers, then what is it other than a wide scale, mutual decision, to not drop prices, or even stop raising them. The there are also things like the service landlords are using to determine how much they should set their rent rates too, that is literally a collusion app.

[-] NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

What if reform the classist society? Checkmate Luxemburg.

[-] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Just more casual references to violence. It's cool when the left does it.

[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There is a distinct difference between progressive and reactionary violence

The rule of "law and order" takes constant systemic violence to upkeep, to protect the ruling class, their private (not personal!) property and interests.

This violence of the ruling classes is normalised, even legalized/codified in law. Standing up against it, however, and enacting systemic change is branded by their lackeys as "terrorism" or "violent chaos".

Class struggle is a constant fight of one class to oppress another. Currently in most of the world, the exploitative classes oppress the exploited ones. For society to progress, the exploited must suppress the exploiters.
(Or for the expropriators to be expropriated as Marx put it. But that's just the same in fancy)

After all

One person's terrorist is another one's partisan

Mao put it quite well, which is why all following quotes are from him
(btw jsyk: quoting someone on a specific issues doesn't mean supporting their views in general/every other aspect)

"War is the continuation of politics." In this sense, war is politics and war itself is a political action; since ancient times there has never been a war that did not have a political character.... However, war has its own particular characteristics and in this sense, it cannot be equated with politics in general. "War is the continuation of politics by other . . . means." When politics develops to a certain stage beyond which it cannot proceed by the usual means, war breaks out to sweep the obstacles from the way.... When the obstacle is removed and our political aim attained the war will stop. Nevertheless, if the obstacle is not completely swept away, the war will have to continue until the aim is fully accomplished.... It can therefore be said that politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed. - "On Protracted War" (May 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, pp. 152-53 *

Revolutions and revolutionary wars are inevitable in class society, and without them it is impossible to accomplish any leap in social development and to overthrow the reactionary ruling classes and therefore impossible for the people to win political power. - "On Contradiction" (August1937), Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 344.*

War is the highest form of struggle for resolving contradictions, when they have developed to a certain stage, between classes, nations, states, or political groups, and it has existed ever since the emergence of private property and of classes. - "Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War" (December 1936), Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 180.

This is why only after the abolition of classes, private property and states (ie. communism), will the contradictions, which are the root cause of virtually all large scale violence, be resolved.

Which in turn is why:

We are advocates of the abolition of war, we do not want war; but war can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun. - "Problems of War and Strategy" (November 6, 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 225.

[-] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago
[-] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I- what does this even mean? TwT

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 9 points 1 year ago

It means they’re too lazy and uninformed to respond. They’d rather attack you with argument counterpoints manufactured by the right wing, as opposed to using their brain and digging deeper into the “why” behind something.

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 3 points 1 year ago

You peddled a right wing argument talking point. Nobody likes violence but sometimes it becomes inevitable. History shows it. When we’re all reduced to renting forever and essentially being serfs to corporate America, do you think voting is going to solve all of our problems? The ruling class will never allow you to vote away their power.

[-] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

2/3rds of American own their own home. Home purchasing rates are up for Gen z compared to millennials

Try again to justify your violence but use actual data.

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 2 points 1 year ago

I don’t need to justify anything. History has already shown us how this will go, even if it’s a slow, arduous process.

Keep trying to paint “the left” with sweeping generalizations as violence lovers while claiming not to be right wing.

[-] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're correct, it's not the entire left. I should have said tankies and got real specific with it.

Great job ignoring the actual facts and reality though.

[-] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Short hand for the following:

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

Removing power from the ruling class can be done without violence. In fact, whenever people have tried exactly that, with purely democratic and peaceful means (eg, Allende in Chile) it has been the ruling class that has resorted to violence.

Arguably in a hi-tech media saturated and highly networked era like ours, violent revolution is actually not a practical approach at least for advanced economies. Rosa Luxemburg was talking about her era, just like Saint-Just was talking about his.

[-] IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Sure, I'll just ignore the rest of this thread and replies to me. You should probably inform your community they are saying the quite part out loud .

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

What can I say, welcome to the part of internet where people post memes and shitposts.

[-] squid_slime@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is, it has a hero's tail kinda vibe, terminator perhaps. Whereas the right tend to come off as SkyNet in their violence.

to come back to a serious point though, read History of The Russian Revolution and you will soon see the violence is a reaction to the class antagonism, these striking workers were peaceful till the police started shooting.

this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2024
404 points (100.0% liked)

Lefty Memes

6347 readers
692 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, discussion and agitprop/stuff that's better fit for a poster than a meme 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

Version without spoilers

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. Please post agitprop here)


0.5 [Provisional Rule] Use alt text or image descriptions to allow greater accessibility


(Please take a look at our wiki page for the guidelines on how to actually write alternative text!)

We require alternative text (from now referred to as "alt text") to be added to all posts/comments containing media, such as images, animated GIFs, videos, audio files, and custom emojis.
EDIT: For files you share in the comments, a simple summary should be enough if they’re too complex.

We are committed to social equity and to reducing barriers of entry, including (digital) communication and culture. It takes each of us only a few moments to make a whole world of content (more) accessible to a bunch of folks.

When alt text is absent, a reminder will be issued. If you don't add the missing alt text within 48 hours, the post will be removed. No hard feelings.


0.5.1 Style tip about abbreviations and short forms


When writing stuff like "lol" and "iirc", it's a good idea to try and replace those with their all caps counterpart

  • ofc => OFC
  • af = AF
  • ok => OK
  • lol => LOL
  • bc => BC
  • bs => BS
  • iirc => IIRC
  • cia => CIA
  • nato => Nato (you don't spell it when talking, right?)
  • usa => USA
  • prc => PRC
  • etc.

Why? Because otherwise (AFAIK), screen readers will try to read them out as actually words instead of spelling them


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


That means 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 irrationally 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.



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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS