cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/32127354
Copying my own comment from when this was posted last year:
Every time I see this quaint but misleading image reposted it's necessary to make the same comment: the words attached to each image are do not exclusively represent those images. "Equality" could apply to all but the first; nobody uses "equity" this way; and most people use "justice" to refer to criminal justice and punishment.
ai slop with ai generated citation text...
Wow I almost didn’t catch it - you’re right, it is slop. Sorry you’re being downvoted.
Communism will never, has never and can never work on a large scale.
Yeah, because authoritarian systems always fail, without exception
The only real solution is to remove authority and bring society to adult level - better the other way round though.
remove adults and bring all the kids to the authoritarian level. Check.
Neither can capitalism. But communism is incompatible with war.
history disagrees.
Are you counting defensive wars against capitalist colonizers, fascist invasions, and uprisings against oppressive puppet regimes and tyrants?
Always the victim. Get back to your struggle sessions, and hope the target isn't you.
Are you counting defensive wars against capitalist colonizers, fascist invasions, and uprisings against oppressive puppet regimes and tyrants?
I'm sure you're definition is probably broad enough that that my concept might include some of the wars you'd discount. ..but not all.
in any case, even if I narrowed it down significantly, there'd be enough to disprove "communism is incompatible with war".
Rather, you could say "in theory, communism is incompatible with war, even though it isn't a magical fix for the underlying tendencies and in some cases needs that drive war."
Wars happen for a number of reasons, and there should be a distinction between offensive and defensive wars.
In theory, capitalism is incompatible with war as it is assumed to be a system of fair exchange. Many economists and philosophers followed Ayn Rand in promoting this idea. Obviously it is NOT such a system, and is instead a relentless amoral pursuit of profit and value extraction, and will cheerfully use war to obtain resources while simultaneously extracting value via defense industry stocks. It also uses war to crush any opposed ideologies, which is censorship in its most violent form.
I am not familiar with how communism or socialism is compatible with war outside of Rand's claim that socialism consumes resources leading to demand for more which must be taken from neighbors rather than using a system of free and fair exchange.
there should be a distinction between offensive and defensive wars.
...that difference is entirely which side of the battle line you're on...
yeah, that's why I sidestepped that one. It's an easy pathway into "no, you!"
Who was the aggressor: Germany or Poland? Israel or Iran? Iraq or the US?
Are you saying that there is no such thing as a right or wrong, good or bad side to a violent conflict?
If so, prove it.
No, are you just scrapping for a fight?
No, I'm saying that it's only "no you!" for bad faith actors. I'd like to think that isnt who we're dealing with in this site.
ah. In that case, we can all acknowledge that communism and capitalism have both lead to significant wars and violent non-war actions on the populace.
The Korean war, The invasion of Hungary, the invasion of Czechoslovakia, sino/soviet border conflict, Chinese invasion of Vietnam..
..but let's not pretend that war is the end-all be-all of government criminality. We can look at democide, or just atrocious neglect that had occurred quite a few times in communism, add well as abuse of the populace.
..now, I'm not claiming capitalism is good. But Communism isn't some panacea that prevents tensions and violence.
THE EMPIRE DID NOTHING WRONG!!
Who was the aggressor: Germany or Poland? Israel or Iran? Iraq or the US?
Are you saying that there is no such thing as a right or wrong, good or bad side to a violent conflict?
If so, prove it.
Indeed, there should be a distinction. But Communism isn't exactly angelic in its tendencies, any more than capitalism is.
Ayn Rand was a bitter individual who turned her bitterness into a philosophy, helping many people all across the world turn their own pain into bitterness. I'm not a fan.
Neither capitalism nor communism are strangers to violent censorship, particularly where it concerns opposition to ideology.
There are things that capitalism does better, and there are things that communism does better. Clearly, the ideals and genuine attempt by some in communism to establish sound philosophical merit is there, and that's a good first step. However, the infeasibility of implementation of an effective communism that can also compete with capitalism just isn't there. Concessions are made, and capitalism (or authoritarianism) becomes more and more present, but in ways that aren't acknowledged.
The reality is that capitalism is powerful, and that there is no way of ensuring ideal human behavior. Government and economic systems fail here, and tend to reflect the vices the people in general hold in esteem (whether they would acknowledge that or not).
The proper grounds for change isn't government or economic system, but in the moral ideology of the people. It has to do with the values the people hold in esteem, and are willing to back with action. Any system of governance or economy will begin to reflect those underlying values, whether the starting point be communistic, capitalistic, monarchic, oligarchic, or any variant of governance or economic system.
Communism promises to be the next leap forward. It's only natural to reach for it. But it does not provide what it promises. A dream is not enough. An evolutionary platform must incorporate what exists, not deny it.
That doesn't mean we can't find in communism (and other systems of life) what attracts us, and learn to build systems of love and power in our own lives that reflect those things we love so dearly. Once you've given up on the dream - truly, and without bitterness or apathy - it's only natural to do so.
Everyone can be a tyrant or a puppet if you think different enough
I like how everyone's response so far is "words have no meaning"
Because its true, have you ever seen a war where the sides dont blame each other at the end? Any reasoning given is just hot air as long as the actions dont line up. Udssr said they had to fight the capitalists but proceeded to build the biggest bomb ever created, which is clearly a tool for mass muder and not targeted warfare (tsar bomb - 50mt)
Marxism is anti-utopian, it's based on analyzing how societies evolve over time. What is deemed "authoritarianism" is the need for the proletariat to exert its control over the bourgeoisie, rather than the reverse, yet bourgeois rule is more authoritarian.
That's fine in theory, until the party starts calling everything it sees as a potential opposition or threat to itself and any attempts to adapt to the times "burgeois".
Until you guys create a clear set of rules to permit gradual evolution, dissenting voices, protecting the rights of the individual and political opposition, while preventing things like cult of personality, nobody is getting on that ride again.
(oh wait, there is another ride like that but for the nation instead of the proletariat, it's called fascism...and everybody is getting on it...again)
capitalism: nuking the tree to mine for lithium
Sorry, what is even happening in the last panel? Why does this art look so weird when you look at the people closely? Was this picture AI generated?
Yup, it’s all AI, at least the images and copyright.
This ai generated crap does less than nothing to promote communism.
I have seen this drawing many years ago, I don't think this is AI generated.
Perhaps a base drawing the AI and prompter are riffing off of, but this collage is so nonsensical and only gets worse the more you look at it. Most of it is either AI, or the artist has some very curious mental disorders.
The original drawing from Tony Ruth (2019) can easily be found, it looks the same. Maybe it's just and AI upscaling.
Where is the justice for everyone that Stalin killed by sending them to gulags? To Siberia? Where is the justice for those killed by Khmer Rouge?
The US is capitalist and has greater gulags than Russia ever could and regularly kills and enslaves millions.
We all know that capitalism is bad. It doesn't automatically make communism good.
not even "better".
Whataboutism doesn't answer the question.
Sure it does. Hypocrisy has to be eliminated from the equation first.
No, it responds to the question. Waiting for a perfect hero before calling out problems is an excellent way to enable all kinds of atrocities.
The central committee decreed that the orchard was to be collectivized, and many ladders built and distributed. But when the trees belong to everyone they belong to nobody, and that is who is motivated to care for them. So there would be no apples that year, only tears.
Because community gardens always get destroyed ...
Community gardens still divide the space into individual plots. If I grow a bunch of jalapeño peppers on my plot then it’s not cool if you just come along and harvest them all.
A hobby operated by volunteers isn't load-bearing. Forced collectivization invariably leads to disaster.
No, it doesn’t … You have a central authority that makes sure that doesn’t happen or the community makes sure that doesn’t happen like how hippies grow their own food
what a kludge justice is.
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
Web of links