Understanding Siege Socialism - Gabriel Rockhill joins to talk about a controversial concept for Western socialists: “siege socialism”. A term coined by the great Michael Parenti.
“authoritarian” is a buzz word that left-liberals like yourself use to attack any country that has successful left-economic programs. Whether you realize it or not, you have been trained to deploy this label in defense of US empire.
“authoritarian” is a buzz word that left-liberals like yourself use to attack any country that has successful left-economic programs.
Not how I’m using it here, which is a direct comment on how a Lemmy instance is run. If you want to pretend the tankie triad aren’t authoritarian then you’re too stupid to discuss anything with, honestly
Whether you realize it or not, you have been trained to deploy this label in defense of US empire.
No, I haven’t, I’m one of the filthy socialists who argue in favor of many of the ideas of those regimes. You just see someone pointing out the bad of the tankie triad and make assumptions that I’m not firmly on the left and just disgusted by how high they are on the compass compared to me
You can’t think why people interested in collective benefit and free dissemination of tools, while rejecting free markets and the profit motive, might have some meaningful overlap with believing in socialism?
That’s why a system like China’s is the only sensible one for a large country in the present world order - leaving important things up to unregulated markets and media is an abdication of responsibility.
There are any number of capitalist platforms. Yet here you are on one developed under communist principles. And still too indoctrinated to work out the connection.
‘I would like to enjoy the benefits of collective efforts without supporting the political ideology that makes it possible in the first place.’
That “ideology” is authoritarianism
Spamming links with quotes that are unrelated?
The point was that the tankie triad are authoritarian, that’s just a fact
“authoritarian” is a buzz word that left-liberals like yourself use to attack any country that has successful left-economic programs. Whether you realize it or not, you have been trained to deploy this label in defense of US empire.
Not how I’m using it here, which is a direct comment on how a Lemmy instance is run. If you want to pretend the tankie triad aren’t authoritarian then you’re too stupid to discuss anything with, honestly
No, I haven’t, I’m one of the filthy socialists who argue in favor of many of the ideas of those regimes. You just see someone pointing out the bad of the tankie triad and make assumptions that I’m not firmly on the left and just disgusted by how high they are on the compass compared to me
What did the “authoritarian” Lemmy instances do, make you eat your spinach? 😂
What makes it possible is the material conditions.
Are you sure it’s possible because of toxic ideology, or despite it? I may want to see the math on that.
You can’t think why people interested in collective benefit and free dissemination of tools, while rejecting free markets and the profit motive, might have some meaningful overlap with believing in socialism?
There are endless positive but fundamentally dysfunctional ideologies. Anything which doesn’t address how large populations behave is dysfunctional.
Edit: Ideas about making the world better but which are stupid ideas = positive ideas, but dysfunctional. In fewer words, naive.
To be distinguished from fascism et all which are about hurting people, thus negative ideas.
That’s why a system like China’s is the only sensible one for a large country in the present world order - leaving important things up to unregulated markets and media is an abdication of responsibility.
Lol no
This is so vague that it’s meaninglessness.
There are any number of capitalist platforms. Yet here you are on one developed under communist principles. And still too indoctrinated to work out the connection.
This can be done under right wing libertarianism as well. Or general green people. Idk.
A society based on worship of individualism is diametrically opposed to collective efforts.