this post was submitted on 31 May 2024
499 points (91.1% liked)

Lefty Memes

4298 readers
792 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
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The issue with that is that you're still making money on a human right. That property is gonna gain value and eventually you'll be able to sell it for more than you bought it for, all on the back of the tenants. Unless you're planning to give the tenants the house when they pay the value of it but at that point there's no reason for you the own it to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (6 children)

I'm confused. Are you saying people shouldn't have to pay for housing? For food? For electricity?

They're providing/enabling the human right. Why do you describe it as if they were making money off of necessity without trade and giving?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

I'm saying landlords are parasites and there's no way to excuse what they do as a good thing or necessary.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

"they're providing/enabling..."

WOAH there, pardner.

They don't PROVIDE anything.

They hoard a finite resource for financial gain. Full stop.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Is every landlord the same? Are they all big companies out for profit? Or what?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

They do though? They provide a place to live that you can move into way faster than you can if you were buying it. They cover the maintenance costs, and some even provide properties that are fully furnished.

I agree that they hoard properties for financial gain but they do provide something.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Yes. I would say people shouldn't have to pay for the basic necessities required to live. Why should anyone live with the threat of homelessness and starvation?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

Because it takes time and resources and create and maintain housing... who will pay for it, and why is it the landlord's fault instead of whoever isn't taking that responsibility (government???).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

That's a good goal, but leaves open how it can be implemented.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They’re providing/enabling the human right.

You are literally saying that your human rights should be privately owned by somebody else. If that's the case, why even bother with human rights?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You gotta separate the concept of a right from fulfilling them.

You can have a human right. But that alone does not answer how it is fulfilled.

The right is not owned. It can't be.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You gotta separate the concept of a right from fulfilling them.

Says who?

If a human right only exists on paper it's not a right - it's a buzzterm for political racketeers to throw around. Fulfilling a "bill of rights" is the core part of the (so-called) "social contract" between the liberal state and it's subjects - if it's merely "fulfilling" those by pretending they exist, the existence of the liberal state - and liberalism itself - becomes irrelevant and unjustifiable to the subjects.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If a human right only exists on paper it’s not a right

A right is a right. It doesn't just disappear.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

Fantasizing about rights doesn't make them real - or even relevant.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

My landlord didn't pay for nor make the land my place is on. Nor the place I reside on. Yet he jacks up the rent every march as soon as he can, as much as he legally can.

My landlord doesn't clean the lots, doesn't clean the public bathrooms, doesn't do anything but come on by to complain about the lots he doesn't improve.

How he is providing anything but less money in my family's bank account, and an headache to everyone he complains to?