this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
2116 points (96.6% liked)

Lefty Memes

4343 readers
1795 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, and discussion 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)


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 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes to taking away wealth or the way to leverage it?

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Taking away (extreme) wealth. There's no reason one person should have that much. There's countless better ways to use that money/wealth than for one persons extravagant lifestyle. And even if they don't have an extravagant lifestyle, what are they gonna do with it? Doubt they will build infrastructure out of good will with it.

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So take away ownership of a company just because it's too successful? That wealth is mostly in company ownership, so are you really suggesting we steal away legitimate ownership in successful companies?

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. Fuck Capitalism.

It's not stealing their legitimate ownership. They don't have legitimate ownership.

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How is it not legitimate ownership?

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why don't the workers own it? The ones who actually do the work.

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because they didn't make the business. If you started a business would you be happy to give away that ownership to every new employee you hire? If so, that's your choice, have fun.

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes I'd be happ to.

Who cares who made it? And it's not the CEO that made it. The workers made it. Ever seen a big corporation with only one employee, its founder? No.

Without the workers a company is nothing. Without it's founder the company couldn't care less.

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So it doesn't matter to you that you had to spend millions on startup costs, and that the business probably won't make money for a year or two, you keep that all to yourself, continue to pay employees, and give employees equal ownership?

Yeah, let me know how that works out for you.

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Yea I don't care. I would not even start a company like that. Private ownership over companies (see means of production) must be abolished

[–] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you’re saying we should just be communists now?!

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Yea, pretty much.

But don't forget about the Anarcho- part!

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Ummm... most companies are like that, it's very rare to have no startup costs and profits immediately. I would hate to think the options we would be stuck with if food and drinks were only what the government decided to support.

[–] kugel7c@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The laws underpinning and protecting their ownership, as well as the institutions enforcing them, are historical holdovers and were never truly legitimised. They also largely go against justice, freedom and the pursuit of happines, which they largely champion as their goals.

At least you could think about it that way.

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not seeing how that makes any of it illegitimate. If you make something you own it, right? Why should a business be any different?

[–] kugel7c@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At the end of the day because the assumption that it shouldn't be any different for a business is flawed. And specifically because we live in a reality where this assumption is largely taken as truth and as a result laws get written by Musk Bezos Koch Gates ... and / or the companies they use to do their bidding. Which often enough have very bad outcomes, and are obviously bad laws, not only in hindsight.

While they are supposed to be written by the people for the people. Democratically. The Private company in this way wields authoritative Power over it's employees and with this power it often enough opposes or distorts the will of the people because the few owners get outsized control over the actions of many workers customers and so on. As such if there isn't a limit to private ownership of Capital/The means of production/Business there can never be anything more than a hollow democracy, a democracy where the word is used to describe itself but the spirit of the word can never be reached.

We are on lefty Memes here so a bunch of people likely want a less hollow and more true democracy in this sense. Which is why it should be different for a business or at large scale.

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

So basically what you are saying is the more successful a business is, the more of it we should steal away from the rightful owners?

[–] kugel7c@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Yes the ones that draw the largest benefit from a society should contribute the largest amount back. If there is infinite growth for some and infinite servitude for others the social contract is breaking, in this way it's much more reasonable to actually use taxation instead of just standing by while the society that all this wealth was extracted from takes violent revenge to their oppressors.

Without the rest of us billionaires couldn't exist to begin with, so if their wealth starts breaking our governments, our communities, our collective self determination, which they currently are doing, we naturally should remind them that they are nothing without the rest of us. And yeah the taxhammer is likely the more appropriate tool than the guillotine or the Molotov cocktail.

Their wealth presupposes a largely peaceful society, why should we let them break it. This is for example why GG Art 14 has

(1) Property and the right of inheritance shall be guaranteed. Their content and limits shall be defined by the laws. (2) Property entails obligations. Its use shall also serve the public good.

written back to back in the same paragraph, the obvious implication being uses of property that go against the public good may be curtailed by the law.

[–] someacnt@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, why do we have 'too big to fail" companies? Isn't that counterproductive to having a robust society?

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's how you compete in the world. Imagine for a second if the US didn't bail out the automotive companies, I think Ford would have survived, but that's about it, no more American competition for them. If they also failed, then we might not have any US car companies, how bad would that have been for our society?

Or the banks, could you imagine how screwed we would be if the whole baking system collapsed? Even the small banks were in trouble, it's not a solution to just split them all up.

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

This is why I don’t really ‘get’ the perspective that a lot of Lemmings seem to have. Sure, it’d be nice to live in an ideal society of some sort, but that’s not really possible in a world where money is everything.

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Then get rid of money as well.

[–] Dark_Blade@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Great idea genius, next you'll tell me that the solution to get rid of human greed would be to get rid of humans!

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So everything is free and we just trust people will put in their fair share?

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I think we both know that will never work.

[–] EnmaAi22@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I do think it will work under the right circumstances

[–] Chriskmee@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

And what are those right circumstances? What would stop me playing video games and relaxing all day?