!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
true capitalism results in economic singularities and infinite wealth for everyone.
No it doesn't. I have no idea where you came up with that thought, but it's totally incorrect. And that's the entire fundamental basis of your concept, so everything else stemming from it is incorrect too
So your opinion isn't even wrong, because it's an opinion about a non-reality
Yes, this confused me. Also wouldn’t unregulated capitalism just end with one company in the end?
Yes, the end result of unregulated capitalism is always power getting concentrated into a handful of individuals while the rest of the planet's billions of people are effectively in poverty and powerless
I think this is every system though. Or maybe thats what they want us to think, so we accept capitalism as the default choice.
Your definition of capitalism is wrong.
Capitalism is where an ownership class possesses the means of production, a labor class which operates the means of production is undercompensated, and the amount by which they are undercompensated is passed to the ownership class.
"Unregulated competition" is libertarianism, which is just the shitty cherry on top of capitalism.
Nothing you've said is at all "leftist".
Depends what you mean by, "enjoy capitalism".
Enjoy being able to buy what ever you can afford even if it's something silly that you don't really need? Sure. Also wholly possible under many other economic systems, because "capitalism" is not simply using money.
Enjoy it in that you enjoy stealing value from employees and getting unjustly rich off of their labor?
Not so much.
I don't know where you got your definition of capitalism "results in economic singularities and infinite wealth for everyone", but it's wrong. The West is currently in late-stage capitalism, which is always the outcome of a capitalist system: wealth and power gets consolidated into the hands of the few, while the many suffer.
The term "leftist" can best be described politically, as supporting the political left. The problem with that term currently is that it's used to define non-political ideology as well, like social aspects such as empathy/sympathy. I'm unsure where you stand when you call yourself "leftist" so it's hard to say if your definition can mix with capitalism.
Fundamentally, in my opinion no, enjoying capitalsim is supporting a system that inherently causes inequality, wealth gaps, and the concept of profits over people, which are the opposite of a standard definition of "leftist" beliefs no matter how you define it.
My question to you is, would you still blindly support capitalism if you were one of the many who didn't benefit from it?
Aside from your odd definition of capitalism and its outcomes, which other people have addressed, the answer to the headline question is: yes.
Karl Marx, for example, believed that you could not have capitalism without exploitation and that it was therefore an unethical system that should be defeated. He also held that capitalism was inherently contradictory and that it therefore not only should be destroyed, but that it must be destroyed.
However: Marx also believed that capitalism was an enormous improvement on the previously existing social system of feudalism, because it produced far greater wealth through the development of new technology. This is a key difference between Marxism and the earlier 'utopian socialism' (which his theories largely replaced), which saw technology itself as an evil.
Marx also welcomed the fact that capitalism destroyed (as he saw it) some earlier forms of oppression (albeit while introducing new ones). Marx's letter to Abraham Lincoln congratulating him on his re-election discusses the American Revolution and Civil War in precisely these terms.
So, you can enjoy the greater (obviously not 'infinite'!) abundance of goods that capitalism has produced, you can acknowledge its positive impact on technological development and its material improvements of the lives of millions of people and be not only a leftist but a fully orthodox Marxist... just so long as you also acknowledge that capitalism is also an exploitative and self-destructive force that should, can and must be defeated.
Enjoy? sure.
Legitimately and wholeheartedly defend, even to yourself? Less sure.
Very much yes!
Leftist doesn't mean communist or socialist.
And also doesn't mean a specific economic model, more a set of principles that guide your reasoning and behaviour (hopefully)
To be any kind of leftist at all, you have to believe in equality in society, in providing for all, and opposing hierarchy. There are many interpretations of how to get to such a place, though socialism encompasses the biggest ones.
You can enjoy the things you have access to in the current system, but enjoying the system itself, which forces us to enrich billionaires, destroys the planet, pushes us into poverty, and wastes our time and potential working on what the market wants instead of what we want, is fundamentally anti-leftist.
What would be an example of a non-socialist but leftist school of thought?
Nothing. Liberals don't know the difference between being a leftist and being on a national left.
Anarchism.
I feel like most anarchists identify as socialists, so I’m not sure about that one.
Social democracy
A form of capitalism…
From Wikipedia:
Social democracy is a social, economic, and political philosophy within socialism that supports political and economic democracy and a gradualist, reformist, and democratic approach toward achieving social equality.
While it is not an objective definition, I think it is a valid point of view to see social democracy rather as a reformist variant socialism than capitalism.
Read a book. Social democracy is a reformation of capitalism, not socialism. It is literally a process that starts with a capitalist country. No country has ever started with socialism and then reverted to social democracy. It is a stage of capitalism making concessions to the working class.
If you were well-read in socialism, you'd know that there are a lot of disagreeing factions, and those disagreements include semantic ones over what is and isn't socialism.
So you tell me, what is socialism? Is marxist-leninism socialism? Is Cuba socialist? Current-day China? Mao's China? Rojava? Would a society organized in worker co-ops be socialist?
Deflection. Regardless of your definition, none of the countries you listed or any other country considered socialist has ever reverted to social democracy. Again, it is a phase capitalism where concessions are given to the working class. Only capitalist countries attempt it.
Deflection
Says the person who declines to answer simple questions.
none of the countries you listed or any other country considered socialist has ever reverted to social democracy
This is the most incoherent argument I've read all week. What does it matter if a country reverts to what? Also, some USSR states did revert to social democracies, but that probably doesn't count to you because of reasons. To be clear, I don't care about your reasons for that.
In terms of societal left, it would be equal opportunity and fairness without discrimination in any kind of economic apparatus. Maybe some sort of meritocracy?
Yes it does.
If this question isn't fake, it shows how senselessly polarized pictures drawn by both sides have become.
What’s your definition of capitalism? What exactly is it about capitalism that you enjoy that is specific to capitalism?
Sounds like Anarcho-Capitalism
If your friends always play Monopoly and you get dragged into it, do you refuse to have fun on principle? Or do you choose to have a blast with your friends, occasionally chuckle at the game's shortcomings, and indulge in exploiting some of its weaknesses to ensure you come out on top? (That last one is optional and depends on you getting assigned to play the banker)
Great questions. I play Monopoly willingly. I see it as important satire and fun.
Where are you from OP? Right-left is a spectrum. There is nuance. Where I live, polarization is a problem, due to some far right fuckers holding our politics hostage. Any nuance is immediately derided as being 'far left'.
There's contexts for the left-right sperctrum, like social, economic or cultural. To throw in a few crude generalizations: social leftists are for a more equal society for the rich and poor alike with equal chances in terms of education, affordable housing and medical care. Cultural leftists are more open to foreign influences like migrants and niche cultural stuff and economic leftists lean toward a more honest economic structure with more government regulation on big corporations.
So it is perfectly possible to be culturally / socially left-ish, but economic right-ish.
no.
Yes, politics isn't a binary system. It's a spectrum. There's multiple dimensions. For each of them you can have your own opinion. I dare say there are no two people with identical political profiles.
Some dimensions are (source chatgpt):
You can even vary within a dimension depending on the topic, for instance globalist on environmental topics but otherwise nationalist.
chatgpt aside this is a much more realistic way to look at it than left / right.
Absolutely.
That's called social democracy. At its core, being left means being anticapitalist. Social democracy itself does not reject capitalism, though does regulate it strongly (and rightly so).
One reason people may favour social democracy is that it allows for a market economy, but another for opposition is that this still enables bribery through lobbies, as in all forms of capitalism.
And so I myself (being an ancom) wouldn't count social democracy as quite being left. But it's a good introduction for liberals and centrists to eventually get them on board with more thorough democratic socialism.
No it's not
Sure
Difficult. Very difficult to enjoy any capitalism, because there is hardly any capitalism left on this planet.
(See: Techno-Feudalism)