this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2024
821 points (100.0% liked)

196

18116 readers
589 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 54 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I dont think anything you said would qualify you as a "socialist"

[–] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 32 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Counterpoint: If you ask most elected officials edit: in the US (of either party), any two of those as policy goals would make you a socialist.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

fuck the US, why is it relevant what they think?

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You'll find out when we get done with our "Republic" arc and start the "Empire" one.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

you have been on the empire thing for literal decades

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You ain't seen nothing yet, sheltered child of neoliberalism.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

i live in a colony of neoliberalism, im seeing things on a daily basis.

some of which coming from a direct consequence of the empire's decisions. some of which comes from genocides past.

there was never a republic in the first place for us.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And yet you wonder why it's important what America thinks?

Here's hoping you don't find out.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

im not wondering if its important or not, i'm saying its not. what is your point?

you seem to get what the empire is capable of, but you dont get that they are actually doing this stuff already as much as they can, everywhere. we are "finding out" by virtue of US's mere existence.

they will oppress us anyway so might as well think about freedom, and it doesnt matter whether or not the US would like socialism for itself or not, or how their deceiving politicians lie about it.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Counter point, countries exist outside the US

[–] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Fair; I've amended my comment.

[–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

And sometimes perception is reality.

[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I think the abolition of borders falls under the umbrella of socialism

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Socialism means one thing: democratic control over the economy. It's radically left-wing in most of the world, and because of that socialists also advocate for other radically leftist ideas. I'm one of the radical leftists that don't believe governments should exist at all in their current form, but that's not what makes me a socialist.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

isn't government not existing just a form of libertarianism? (not trying to argue or anything; just genuinely curious)

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Kind of. Communism itself is described as a Stateless, Classless, moneyless society, and Anarchism is Stateless as well. Socialism is just collective ownership of industry.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 2 years ago

before chuds hijacked it, libertarianism was always associated with the left. it was variously called anarchism and libertarian socialism.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Socialism being more international isn't just because it's radical, but because Communism can only exist fully if there is no Capitalism anywhere to re-emerge. What you've said is correct, just incomplete IMO.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Depends on whether you think socialism is inherently globalist, which I wouldn't say is necessarily true.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago

It might as well be considering the history of cross-country support. Class above nation, after all.

[–] redprog@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Socialism by definition will take care of most if not all of these