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!
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)
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.
as well as condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.
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).
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
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)
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.
(This is not a definitive list, the spirit of the other rules still counts! Eventual duplicates with other rules are for emphasis.)
Good thing we (the US) lost the war, or this lady would probably have her own team of lobbyists running their country.
I disagree. I don't subscribe to a world view where every life is sacred. Society has a right to protect itself from persons that will always endanger other people and that includes killing them. However, it has been quite clear that we cannot guarantee that no innocent people are killed. And that's why I'm OK with the death penalty only in principle, not in practice.
You cannot know that, and if you have the ability to strap someone down and end their life, you have no need to do so since you clearly have complete control over their person.
You shouldn't be. States qua arbiters of justice should not intentionally kill people under their control.
This is a discussion about personal morals. Some people think it's OK to execute some criminals, others are completely opposed to that idea. There is no objective right or wrong here.
For you your arguments might be compelling, but they don't convince me. I can have complete control over someone and still decide to kill them because I don't want to bother with locking them up, for example. And who says a society should not kill? That's not even an argument, just an opinion.
No, the state killing people is objectively wrong.
Fucking lol. I love Lemmy. I've never seen such an obscure group of people speak in absolutes so consistently. Puts reddit to shame.
"I WILL DECIDE WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG"
"I WILL DECIDE WHAT IS GOOD OR EVIL"
I don't decide. The state murdering people is wrong. I just have the moral wherewithal to recognize the fact.
Which isn't hard because it's objectively true.
Hope this helps.
Ok, I'll play along for a bit.
Prove it is wrong. Use facts and data to prove capital punishment is wrong.
Steven-Chowder-at-a-card-table over here.
I'm not gonna "debate me!" somebody who think murder is cool and good; it isn't.
I don't know who that is. Sorry.
Because you can't. Because it's completely subjective. You've got nothing. Just whiny emotions.
"DEBBBBAAAATE MEEEEEEE!"
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
You good, mate? Do you need a friend or someone to talk to?
Won't you be my neighbor?
you don't keep that control over billionaires.their money has too much loyalty.
so they need to be killed. I do agree that the state shouldn't be making the decision, but Vietnam is weird and still at least dresses up as communist.
Once you take the money they aren't billionaires anymore.
Taking their money away isn’t enough. These billionaires often have deep connections to people who could easily help them regain their wealth and power. I’m not sure what the answer is but taking the money won’t solve the problem in every case.
So take their money too.
but money is just an idea; easier to put a bullet in them than rewrite the entire social perception of them.
It's easier to put bullets in things than to do alot of things, what's your point?
It's easier to shoot someone than to change your sheets but it doesn't make your bed smell less of piss.
it takes seconds, other way takes years, and its not worth risking it getting away. it's not human anymore, and its a danger to humans, so if its not down for trying to be human again; kill it. don't waste the effort when there are living people who need help.
And you end up with dirty sheets. No matter how fast it is it doesn't address your problem.
Don't call people "it" my dude.
Irrespective how monstrous a person acts they're still a human and you can't distance yourself and your capacity to engage in the same monsterousness they did by dehumanizing them.
so I dont care about biology-on a moral level; obviously its cool and I need to think about it at lunch- a life is precious for actual reasons
and being wealthy diminishes just about all of those reasons.scientifically, there are studies that prove it. the wealthy are less intelligent less logic less compassionate less connected to the world. they dehumanize, in the terms that matter to me, themselves.
I'm not suggesting you should get the wall the moment your income slips into six figures, but in extreme cases, where all humanity has fled, theres nothing worth keeping there. its an it. no moral wrong in killing it, at least no more than a rat.
now, I'm not going to go around smashing rats in a hydraulic press for fun. that's sick. but I'm only going to spend so much time doing catch and release in my pantry before I try poison or snapping their necks, because I have other fucking shit to do with my life, and I dont consider the rat worth that much fucking time.
biionaires get coddled from every direction. if nurturing warm fuzzy feelings were going to work, they would have by now, so I'm in favor of actually fixing the problem. that means a guillotine.
So take their money.
You dehumanize yourself when you dehumanize others.
How did that work out for Robespierre?
money isn't money though.
money us the concept of deserving and promise of agency, which has been pressed so deep into them that they are stained with it, to any remaining capitalist loyalists or other idiots.
you can take their money, but that isn't really taking their money. youd need to take their faces, their names, their fingerprints, And the memories of all their secret stashes or things they could use to authenticate to associates. which seems way more fucked than just killing them.
in what ways? ive been through an amount of shit, already skewed pretty far from default. might not be in a way that matters to me. hell, if you could lower my very human chance of breast cancer, I might even be willing to do something I find unpleasant.
generally I agree, but you need to be more specific here. maybe if I salt half as many people arguing half as much for the dignity and humanity of the unhoused and laboring classes, it would be easier to rake this shit seriously, but I'm not going to devote a second more than necessary to dealing with billionaires, and in a revolution, that means a bullet.
that fucker's problem was trying to autocratically lead a movement of popular power while keeping the people infantilized. nothing wrong with killing the aristocracy.
Pretty sure money is money, and you can take it.
It makes you the type of person who can dismiss the humanity of other humans as "other" and we know what kind of atrocities that leads to.
What about universal human dignity applying universally takes away the right of dignity from the unhoused?
Human dignity isn't a zero-sum game. That's billionaire thinking.
Take billionaires' assets, not their lives (post-fact).
if money were money, the stock market wouldn't exist.
if money were money, Donald trump would be a beggar in a gutter.
if money were money, the wealthy would pay taxes.
if money were money, you could do a revolution with the power of gold.
its not, he's not, they dont, and you can't.
why? based on what? at what point(s) does it start applying? at what point(s) does it stop?
what if I go into a coma. total vegetative state.
what if, in that vegetative state, my brain starts to physically die, which parts would I need still biologically functioning (though no longer effectively being a brain) to qualify?
if I take a shit, there are human cells in that. does it deserve dignity?
if I die, that's human. does it deserve less dignity if it gets burned, or when the blood is switched out for embalming fluid?
what about another animal just as intelligent and just as capable of feeling as us, maybe more? say an elephant, a whale, a cuttlefish?
what about a hypothetical uploaded mind? or a from-scratch agi; what traits would it have to have to acquire various degrees of human dignity, and not just be a script/dataset for me to copy+paste+delete at my whim?
if you think about it, and make it more than some mystical magical woowoo bullshit, some things are going to have at least a talon/tentacle/hoof in that aren't 'human' and some things are going to be out that appear very much 'human', and maybe even were in the past.
most if my criteria for giving a shit are things you are scientifically proven to lose with wealth. are they recoverable? maybe, in the way you can unmix a drink. and in an ideal world, maybe we should. we dont live in an ideal world. the labor cost and risk to others whose humanity is at risk (from dying) takes precedence; its a triage thing.
and if it's happening; I might as well enjoy it. revenge can feel nice, even if its usually stupid and counterproductive.
Being Human
First breath; fetuses aren't people
It doesn't.
Getting a bit off topic your advocacy of murdering people after their wealth has been seized
Why the hell advocate violence if not to effect ideals?
which is what?
why?
okay so when I die where does that dignity go? my writings? my body, my soul?
because your version of this idea sounds anawful lot like a soul.
no I'm not, you just can't answer because you haven't thought out your ideas. I don't even think they're inherently bad, I think youre just wearing them like an aesthetic.
A supernatural comedy drama on BBC3
What are you, a toddler? You asked for a cutoff and I gave you one. If you didn't want an answer, don't ask.
What's your point? I never mentioned "a soul" as it relates to human dignity but if even you seem to be using it as equivalent to or allegory for writings so what if it does sound like that?
Like you seem to be trying to sculpt my position to some preconceived notion you have of organized faith so you can then attack that when I have never mentioned religion.
I just said you shouldn't murder people once you've already seized "their" assets.
see I don't respect the BBC.
what makes that cutoff meaningful? seems arbitrary. explain why its not?
is my corpse deserving of dignity? the computer program? the whale?
I'm saying you have essentialized 'human' and designated it special, without any explanation (or appreciation) of why it's special or cool. it sounds an awful lot like 'the thing I am is special because I'm one'. which sounds pretty Fucking religious to me.
so explain. feel free to get weird with it.
I'm also saying you can't sieze all their assets. money isn't just money, and its not the only thing that's money.
You shouldn't.
Fetuses don't have rights.
What the heck are you talking about? Find the things which can be exchanged for goods and services and that those things away. Cart off shiny rocks. 0 out electronic ledgers
Billionaire handshakes are meaningless. If you've seized all the food and means of production what does it matter if gardeners try to play Parker Bros. with one another?
so sane page then.
see I notice you ignored the hard part of what I have to say, which tells me you can't really describe this thing you respect or why you respect it.
okay see this is just super unrealistic.
yeah sure after its already established for a while and money is a historical relic like skull calipers you can ignore them. that takes a while, and they're threats until then.