• MissJinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      you knoe there isn’t only 2 choices right? Thay can both have good and bad sides. Maybe try some mix of it fisrt

      • umbrella@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        we tried that before though, improving things temporarily, but it will never be permanent until we extinguish the owner class.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The trick is not falling for the lie that social democracy is meeting socialism in the middle.

          Social Democracy is just liberalism with enlightened self interest. Is it better than other capitalists models?

          Sure. That doesn’t make it the end goal.

        • Gigan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think human nature is inherently greedy and selfish, and capitalism is best equipped to use this in a way that benefits society. Workers are motivated to work harder and learn new skills to find the most rewarding job they can. Businesses are motivated to create products and run as efficiently as possible. Consumers are motivated to get as much value as the can out of their money. Everyone in the equation is acting selfishly and in their own self-interest (which I believe humans are inclined to do anyway) but when applied on a societal level, everyone benefits. However I will concede that this is a balancing act that requires some level of government regulation to maintain.

          On the other hand, I think communism only works when everyone acts altruistically. Which is noble, but unrealistic.

          • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Lol, lmao even. Capitalism rewards greed it doesn’t mitigate it. You’ve got it twisted.

            • Jon_Servo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              It’s the inability to see the forest for the trees. We were raised in a capitalist economic system, as were all of our past family members. The failings of capitalism appear to be the failings of human nature. In reality, meta analysis of multiple studies on human greed show that people will be inherently more kind to each other than be cruel. Quick search will bring up many articles on these studies. Plus, exchanges in material goods within communities where money hadn’t been invented would show that people didn’t barter, they gave their goods away to their neighbors, and the good deed would be remembered and reciprocated in times of need. You can look up “Gift Economy” in Wikipedia.

              • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                I also highly recommend reading or listening to the audiobook for The Dawn of Everything A New History of Humanity by David Graeber and David Wingrow. It is extremely interesting and eye opening.

          • Taleya@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Nope.

            Human nature is co-operative and altruistic, there’s evidence going back to barely recognisable AS human and it’s literally a key reason why we’re the dominant species.

            Capitalism rewarding sociopaths is the outlier

          • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Not going to downvote, but I do think you’re lacking quite a bit of insight into the reasons human society exists at all. Cooperation is the reason human society exists at all, so saying we’re inheritly selfish is kinda laughable in that context.

            I would encourage you to look up information on dialectical Materialism and the necessity of capitalism as a stage in that dialectical.

            Capitalism had a purpose, and it’s past time for us to move on.

          • Moxvallix@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Explain open source, free software, linux community, lemmy / the fediverse, and many many other things not formed around profit, largely maintained by people in their free time motivated by community over profit.

            People aren’t inherently greedy. People are born into a system that rewards greed, and punishes altruism. There have been many different societies with many different political and economic systems, and capitalism is a fairly new one all things considered.

            Rational self interest is irrational. If only a few can succeed, chances are you fail. If everyone only looks out for themselves, then everyone fails. Humanity’s biggest strength — what set us apart from many other animals — is our ability to work together and look out for each other.

            Capitalism doesn’t work, and is destroying the Earth.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Even if it was true that human nature was inherently greedy and selfish then it would be an argument for creating systems that discourage such behaviors. What you’re arguing is akin to saying that you should encourage a person struggling with alcoholism to drink more.

            • Gigan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I agree. Businesses and owners have too much influence. I want more unions, trust-busting, and consumer protections. Workers seem to be organizing more at least, which is a good start.

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      People are starving every damn day under Capitalism and there is no famine going on. This isn’t the dunk you think it is.

      • Icalasari@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        No it isn’t, but it does highlight the main issue:

        Communism would work if it weren’t for people trying to co-opt it for power

        Fully Automated Luxury Space Communism is the end goal (since, it being automated, means there should effectively be no way to hijack it), but we ain’t getting there for a long time. Let’s go for socialism first and work from there

        • pivot_root@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Communism would work if it weren’t for people trying to co-opt it for power

          As long as there exists a way to gain power over others, someone will do it. That’s just the reality of our nature, unfortunately.

      • Godric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’ve been to Capitalist countries, I’ve been to Communist countries.

        Guess which system has their people immigrating to the other system on rafts with their children, just to try the other system. Guess which system builds walls to keep people IN, guess which system has beggars asking for milk for their children instead of money.

        Your comment isn’t the dunk you think it is when it brushes up against the harsh truth that is reality.

        • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Bruh I’ve seen families begging for food outside of grocery stores in the United States of America. Now what communist countries had beggers asking for milk?

    • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Those famines happened every 10 years before communism, they happened ONCE during in each location and not again since.

      In the meantime capitalism had that death total due to forced starvation every 7 years on average.

  • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    6 months ago

    Ahhh more propaganda that hand waves away the millions of people also starving away under communism. Of course it’s .Ml

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      Bruh i see people starving in the streets of America every damn day.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      There’s never be a full communist or capitalist society. What wears arguing over how far towards either we should go. Also, FYI for those that don’t know The USSR and China are not communist. Both are/were dictatorships that call themselves communist.

      • Icalasari@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        The problem is that you won’t ever get a full communist country, at least not for a very, VERY long time, because you always get those few fartweasels who end up hijacking it and turning it into a dictatorship. You need to eliminate that problem first, and with how the world is sliding into fascism, it doesn’t look like we’re any where near close to solving that dilemma

      • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Look up dialectical Materialism. China is ‘communist’ as they are progressing along the roadmap Dialectical Materialism provides towards achieving communism.

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    I was in my early 20s when the Soviet occupation collapsed here, the victims here were everyone not high up in the party.

    Sure, capitalism fucking sucks but pretending the USSR was anything other than just bourgeoisie rule is delusional. The oligarchs were just called the communist party then.

    • MIDItheKID@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I don’t understand why anything anti capitalism these days is automatically communism. It’s such a large swing from one side to the other. I just want my taxes to pay for healthcare, infrastructure, and education instead of wars and prisons. I want to stop getting fucked by corporations that have infinitely more money than I can ever imagine. I don’t think that makes me a communist. I’m just anti-fucking-the-people. Capitalism can fuck people. Communism can fuck people too. I support Corpo-Politico-Celibacism. Stop the fucking.

      Edit: Okay, fuck the people. You guys must have this figured out.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      shock therapy was not a socialist, but a capitalist plan after the ussr ended.

          • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            You should look into south america in the 70s and 80s. The CIA’s unrestrained human experimentation in the regiom perfected this ideological soft power superweapon or “strategic ideological construct”. Trying to find exactly what these kinds of things are called.

          • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yea and I was commenting on how things were in a country under the occupation of the USSR. So both temporally and geographiclly unrelated.

            • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Not really. You’re talking about what happened after the USSR. Which yes, was horrible for the quality of life of people who lived in numerous countries all over the globe, but that’s more of an indictment of capitalism than communism. The looting of the government coffers to privatize everything and create oligarchs was a result of the post-USSR shock therapy.

              • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                I was literally talking about the time before the USSR collapsed also it was applied to Russia, not to the countries it occupied.

                • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Ah, I misinterpreted you. Sorry about that. But it’s hard to tell exactly what you’re talking about without more details. Afghanistan, maybe? I get if you don’t want to dox yourself, as someone privacy minded, but it’s hard to know how to respond without more context.

  • Gigan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    6 months ago

    So the tens of millions of people that died under communism were all landlords? Wow, what are the chances of that

    • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      Communism is a bit different than what those “communist” countries had. If anything it was socialism, but that still doesn’t fit completely. These “communist” countries are just one-party states in which the government controls the economy. The idea of putting the working class in power is useless if you create a government that can make decisions against the opinions of the working class. Socialist one-party state ≠ Communist democracy

      • Gigan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Do you have a real-world example of a successful communist state? Because you may not like it, but those “communist” countries are humanities best attempts at enacting communism and they resulted in millions of people dying.

        • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          No. But that doesn’t mean something like a socialist democracy couldn’t be achieved. Socialism isn’t bound to have a certain type of government and if we get rid of capitalism I would still like to have a say in what happens next

        • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Communism only works on paper because it assumes that the people in power are going to just happily share everything equally. Humans don’t work that way, we’re selfish, greedy, and will hurt others to get ahead. There is no difference between a capitalist and communist leader. They both live better, eat better, make more money. There’s no equality there

          • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Humans do work that way. In the wake of disaster, and tragedy, and scarcity, we see people sharing resources and helping each other.

            It’s the sociopaths who seek power that don’t work that way. The biggest success of capitalism is that the sociopaths have normalized their behavior and cast kindness as a flaw or disorder.

      • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        ew a revisionist, it was REAL socialism led by REAL communists and it was based as fuck and the one that are still around are real and they are based. also theres no such thing a one party socialist state that is a myth at most u could say past and present socialist countries has a dominant political party but by no means was there only one, and other parties were and are allowed in those countries.

        • billgamesh@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah. You don’t get to revise away anything uncomfortable. USSR and China were socialist experiments that succeeded in raising quality of life and transforming rural countries into industrial, scientific states. If people wanna talk about what went wrong, great. Pretending they “don’t count” just puppets capitalist apologia and doesn’t help

          • pivot_root@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            From a theoretical point, they don’t count as communist. They entirely dropped the all-important aspect of giving power to the working class.

            Both the USSR and China, in their self-described “communist” periods, were ruled with absolute power and directed by a head of state. The USSR collapsed, and modern China is about as communist as North Korea is democratic.

      • billgamesh@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        The “black book of communism” includes german soldiers who died during WW2, it includes people who might have had 4 kids but only had 2, it includes victims of the US in vietnam.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Also victims of communism: anyone aged 1-99 who happens to be the wrong family, who practices wrong think, who has family members who practice wrong think, who have an opinion, who like to be different, and I can go on for a while…

    People like you should maybe watch 'the chekist". Once you’re done and not crawled up in fetal position while crying maybe you can think for a little bit about what it is that you really want.

    Seriously, you tankie types are nauseatingly naïeve.

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Rent seeking behavior is wrongthink. Being Royalty is practicing wrongthink. Communism is built on Critical Theory making criticism of society its bedrock. I dont consume propaganda, I try to stick to primary sources as close as possible and make my own.

      Seriously you Capitalist Apologists are so brainwashed by literal Cold War Propaganda its pathetic.

      • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        The USSR had a minimum sentence of 5 years of forced labor for being gay. Being gay is also apparently wrongthink.

          • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            You say that but there are numerous people in the comments defending both the USSR and Stalin.

            • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              The USSR did good things and bad things but reactionaries like to pretend it was all bad. There are hard numbers about life expectancy increasing, better life for women, research achievements, general quality of life and happiness metrics, and more that increased. There was lots of bad parts, but same in the US.

              There were anti gay laws on the books for the US, and towns you couldn’t even walk in while black. Hell, there are still some sundown towns in places in the US. If you just point out that stuff, or if you lived in such a horrible area or had family who did spreading their stories, then it will just come off as a hell hole. The US does suck, but it’s not just Skid Row, the projects, lynch mobs, coups, wars, etc. Same for the USSR. There were good things we can save and build on, and bad things we need to avoid for future socialist projects.

              It’s not like the first attempts for democracy went well, either. But I wouldn’t diss it in the Middle Ages and say we can only do monarchies, the pinnacle of political achievements, just because " it never succeeded. It fell in Greece and the Roman Republic and every other time it’s been tried, and has never worked ever and thus is always doomed to fail."

              • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                My problem with people citing those metrics is that they are true for Russia itself while ignoring that a large reason for those improvements was colonialism done to the occupied regions. Industrialisation was another thing that improved those metrics but that was hardly unique to the USSR. Some of those regions may have had benefits but here in Estonia it was pretty much all around bad. After the occupation ended the quality of life here improved rapidly.

                As far as examples for socialism I’d say the USSR was an all around failure but people still defend it and even Stalin who basically guaranteed it’s failure as a socialist project. In the baltic region the word communism is basically poisoned because of the USSR.

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  You need to look at the referendum to maintain the soviet union before you say shit about imperialist Russia. Non-russian SSRs were most enthusiastic about keeping the USSR around.

    • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Somehow I assume you don’t associate capitalism with chattel slavery and apartheid. But you do associate corrupt authoritarianism with economics when it is system that you don’t like.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        What is it with people here thinking that earning a wage is slavery? That requires either a complete lack of understanding what slavery or just some serious impressive mental gymnastics.

        I associate corrupt authoritarianism with communism because it’s an inevitable outcome. Communism only works of you remove individual freedoms and force people into it. This, by design, requires a dictatorship. Dictatorships foster corruption because you can’t have transparency.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s just regular authoritarian statism, tribalism and human herd behaviour.

      Anyone unfortunate enough to have lived through high school knows how dangerous the little human empires are.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Keep in mind that many Americans don’t know Socialism from Communism, as they’ve been schooled that everything responsible for happy Scandinavians is somehow bad.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Should I also keep in mind that most people don’t know how nice Communist counties were to live in? Seriously, give me one, just one country that did communism successfully and where all the people could live in freedom and pursue happiness. Just a single example.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Is there a Capitalist country where all people can “live in freedom and pursue happiness?” What does that even mean? What are the solid metrics by which you track that, so you can say a country passes or fails that?

        • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah, try just about all northern European countries. Are there people that have fallen off the band wagon? Of course there are, shit happens everywhere. However, everyone there loves better and more meaningful lives than in ANY communist country.

          I don’t recall the last time in northern Europe (second world war aside) where literally everyone except a few elites (hello Russia) had to stand in line for hopefully some food

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Why do you believe Northern European countries have it better than AES countries? Do you believe if an AES country copied the Northern European model, their metrics would match Northern European countries?

            Why do you believe inequality is rising in Northern European countries and safety nets are being cut over time?

  • Hiro8811@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Communism hasn’t yet been implemented the original way so we don’t actually know if it works

    • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well. Stop using strawmen. Communism is defined by progress through dialectical Materialism. Has any nation finished that progression?

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah. Nobody’s ever done real communism on a national scale. As in, not just being a dictatorship in charge of everything that funnels money and power to the top while giving communism lip service and the people get screwed.

  • Shadowq8@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I just got permabanned for evading ban on alternative account on reddit. |

    Fuck reddit

    Fuck wallstreet.

  • Lemvi@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    6 months ago

    Ah yes, my grandparents, the landlords. Wait hol’ up, they were working people, not landlords. GDR fucked them regardless.

    “bUt tHAT wASn’T rEaL ComMunIsM” If neither the USSR nor China could achieve true Communism, then maybe it isn’t so much a realistic goal as a utopian ideal, a convenient justification for all kinds of crimes against humanity that occur in its pursuit.

    • DeprecatedCompatV2@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s weird, we tried having a small group of people control the flow of capital and it was unpopular each time. Let’s try it again but call it something different or say it was something else when we tried it before.

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      It wasnt the GDR, it was the totality of global Capital conspiring to defeat the biggest threat to their power structure. What did the GDR do specifically that ‘fucked’ your grandparents?

    • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      The thing is, both USSR/China and USA don’t fit the ideals of Communism. While in USA suffers from the gap between rich and poor, USSR/China suffered from the difference between the people and the government. Just because you get rid of economical suppression doesn’t mean you can’t have political suppression. Sure these countries had economical problems but a lot of their problems could have been avoided if the government would have actually worked for the people and not for themselves.

      • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Neither the USSR or China fulfilled Dialectical Materialism yet either. That’s a prerequisite for the ideals of communism.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Communism isn’t a series of sacrifices for an eventual greater good, Socialism is definitely better than what preceeded Socialism in Russia and China. The idea of True Communism can only be achieved globally, sure, and in the far future, sure, but Communism is about building towards that through gradual improvements.

      You’re implying that any progress forward is useless if it doesn’t immediately achieve a far future society, it’s devoid of logic.

      • Lemvi@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        No, I just have very different ideas what progress is.

        Progress in my eyes is made when a society becomes more democratic, and when we solve conflicts without bloodshed.

        In that sense, sure, the GDR was a step in the right direction, but nazi germany didn’t exactly set the bar very high.

        The idea of socialism is nice, but you hardly have any progress if the system (be it built on free markets or planned economies) doesn’t work to improve ordinary citizens’ lives, but only to keep the powerful in power.

        Personaly, I don’t care much about free markets or planned economies. I think the best approach, as so often, is a kind of blend, a social market economy that allows independent companies in a framework that protects workers, consumers and the environment.

        Thing is, the specifics of the economic system aren’t important. What matters is that the people are the ones who decide them.

        There is nothing wrong with pursuing a utopian society, but ultimatly you have no control over what happens in the far future (neither should you, future societies need to be ruled by future people).

        The only thing you can control is the present and the near future, so what really matters aren’t the ends you strive for, but the means you employ while doing so.

    • Moghul@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’ll be different this time guys, no really, just one more time guys, we’ll get it right, it wasn’t even a good try, let us go again, this time for real, no way it’ll be anything other than a utopia guys, the people will have the power, guys.

    • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      it WAS real communism and ur grandparents probably deserved it. absolute worst case senario no system is perfect and good people still get fucked over sometimes for no good reason, difference is under capitalism it is constant under socialism it is rare.

      • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        As I understand it, “real communism” is supposed to be some kind of stateless society. As the GDR was, well, a state, it clearly did not achieve that. Nor would it ever have been likely to, as actually doing what was ideologically promised would have required those with power within that system to relinquish that power, which is incredibly rare as it conflicts with human nature.

      • NovaPrime@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Take it from a self-identified pinko commie and someone born in one of those regimes, it was not real communism. It was authoritarianism with a strong (but at times selectively applied) social safety net. To say that their grandparents deserved it when you know nothing about them is fucking absurd. You’re not helping your point or cause. You’re just being a child.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        it WAS real communism

        I mean, it wasn’t, at least not according to the actual people who ran those governments. The USSR and the CCP were/are revolutionary governments, real communism happens when/if the revolutionary governments succeeds and transitions the means of control back to the proletariat.

        and ur grandparents probably deserved it.

        Really working hard to build those bridges of mutual respect and cooperation I see. This is one of the key reasons the USSR imploded in the first place.

        The expansion of Soviet influence happened under the influence of Russian chauvinism, a major contradiction with the more successful maoist ideology today. Instead of allowing communism to be shaped by individual ethnicities or nations they did their best to russify or simply purge the base of power in the country, bolshevists or not.

        Stalin and Beria did a whole bunch of purging of leftist to secure their control over the party. If you actually think everyone the Soviets killed deserved it, please go read about the Makhnovist, the Mensheviks, the Georgian bolshevist, hell go read what the Soviets did to the original leftist leader in North Korea.

        difference is under capitalism it is constant under socialism it is rare.

        Unfortunately that’s just not true. Revolutions are highly hierarchical due to their inherent need to react to militant reactionaries. As they begin to solidify their revolution and take over the responsibilities of the state, this hierarchy gets transferred from the the state.

        Authoritarian governments are highly efficient, but are extremely hard to get away from once established. Often times the militant leader of the revolution is not the guy you want to be in complete control of the state after establishing a revolutionary government.

        Mao was decent enough to accept this after the failure of the cultural revolution, Stalin on the other hand…

    • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      u see im very smart if u live under a society u can not criticize it, what RIGHT does a salve have to criticize slavery when they do the masters bidding and eat the food the master provides and wears the clothes the master provides.

      • MissJinx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        When you pay for a luxury brand phone it’s not you master telling you too, it’s you choosing. Don’t come at me with the onipotent lord that control all of us. The system IS broken, captalist is NOT the best for the people but people stiil choose.

        • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Lmao, Capitalism practically requires a phone to get through modern society, buying a decent phone doesnt mean one casts a vote for Capitalism to continue to exist, you absolute ham sandwich.

    • maynarkh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      The iPhone workers designed, workers made, workers marketed, workers transported, workers sold and “landlords” got paid for. It really is a perfect illustration of the issue.

    • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I was told by a gamer that I’m a shill for capitalist corporations cause I like bathesda games.

      I laughed my ass off, every stage of gaming from development to hardware is a capitalist machine. Don’t play games if you don’t want to support corporations

      • MissJinx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I don’t disagree at all! But if you want to scream “milk cpmpanies are bad” don’t go buing their product. I hate people that want to support a cause on the internet but do NOTHING to change it. Usually those are the first ones in line to buy the latest trendy Iphone. Don’t be a caplatist if you don’t want captalism.

        BTW I’m not american. I’m looking from the outside and I only see irony. My country have labour laws and consumer protection and if someone messes with it we make a huge fuzz