- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
NSFW for: Potentially challanging your narrative and worldview.
I recently found this article summarising important findings.
Breaking out of ones own bubble is important. And I would like you to remember this the next time you are at a ballot.
If you really think of the children, vote according to reality.
And if you FEEL personally attacked by this article and bash me in the comments, whataboutism away from the subject or bothsides-ing the issue; Thanks for making my point for me and seek help.
That’s not even close to being correct. The left/right spectrum is basically anti/pro capitalism and hierarchy
But I agree with how your comment ended anyway. But “no taxes” seems untenable, unless you’re also arguing for abolition of the state… in which case I’m curious where you fall on that
Eh, I see how you got there but I dunno about that. In my terms, a Communist (far left) State redistributes all wealth (~100% tax) and in a Minarchist system (far right) there is virtually no tax because there is virtually no State to fund. Thus no reason to employ force to gain said funding. The game theory is clear either way; A small State can only inflict small tyranny. A (mid to) large State typically has a war-machine.
I am more Right-skewed than typical Conservatives. I identify as Libertarian, but the LP itself is/was a mess. Mises Caucus seems legit tho. I believe that the State has limited rightful duties. As enumerated in the Constitution, the feds only need power to 1)Make and maintain currency shit (shit job), 2) Enforce or sovereignty (shit job), and 3) Enforce and promote popular law (shit job). But they want to do everything else…
Do you think your taxes are well spent? I know you dont, lmfao. If they reallocate spending then maybe I’d be cool with (some) taxes. Here and now, no. Im being misrepresented and it’s tantamount to theft. The problem isnt lack of funding, its more a lack of budgeting and prioritizing the wrong stuff. Making another committee or council only worsens the issue. They must be starved.
Dude, I’m sorry, but this just demonstrates a bizarre misunderstanding of the left and right spectrum, and a complete misunderstanding of communism.
The left-right dichotomy most certainly represents opposition or favour toward liberal capitalist democratic states. Here’s a rough outline.
Where on Earth did you hear that communists want to redistribute all wealth through a 100% tax? Seriously, wtf is that all about?
Communists want workers to control their work and work their own way without a boss taking all the profit.
deleted by creator
I accidentally deleted my own comment :,]
Communism and fascism look almost indistinguishable when compared to minarchism. The ONLY way for that to be true is to ascribe to ‘horseshoe theory.’ I don’t. I think the game theory IS the Occam’s Razor: A small govt can only inflict small tyranny, and reciprocally.
Benito said that “Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.” I believe this describes our so-called Neo-Libralism strikingly well… The US government is a rouge agent. They spy on us, they fight unconstitutional wars, they allow monopoly, they engage in obvious nepotism. The corruption is so deep its almost impossible to even begin. And its all funded by average joes tryna live a little life for themselves.
If I make [labor], how does it become the peoples’ [labor]? It gets redistributed. If you dont earn fiat but get to keep your [widget] and government redistributes your [widget] then you have ostensibly been taxed at n%. Where you are one person and the people are many, therefore n% is presumably quite high.
In literally no universe is this true. Fascism has an all-encompassing state with all power vested in an individual; communism has no state and all power distributed among all the people
Like I said, we can get nowhere before you understand these basic things
You say Im propagandized :33 Both require Government+Corporate collusion. Oh, excuse me, in the new-speak, Community+MeansofProduction.
Show me a stateless Communism. However, we really should condense replies so we dont get out of whack.
This is pure fantasy. If there’s any ideology more opposed to corporate power, it’s communism. Do you even know what communism is? Please, give me a real answer.
“New-speak”? Workers seizing the means of production is literally in the Communist Manifesto. This isn’t some hiding of a real agenda or a new addition. Why are you so ignorant to the theory of the ideology you spend so much effort “critiquing”?
Please, tell me what is so absurd to you about the idea of workers democratically managing an organisation together. Tell me what is so absurd about the people democratically managing production as a whole together. Why does this sound so oppressive to you? Why does this speak to you of state power, or of corporations?
The state spends so much effort suppressing people when they try to organise. The state hates this. This is a threat to the state. The same is true of corporate power. When workers unionise, corporations panic and beg the state to intervene. The state has intervened and sent in armed police to gun down union organisers, and that’s ignoring the times corporations have sent private goon squads to put down native workers in foreign countries.
State and corporate power are against communism. Why do you think the US has invaded so many countries that have attempted it, to put it down and halt it in its tracks?
I’m sorry, but for the reasons stated above it’s pretty impossible to do that. But it has existed in pockets, such as revolutionary Catalonia.
No, we just won’t get anywhere until we get past the foundations.
I don’t believe in horseshoe theory and it still makes sense. Why shouldn’t this make sense?
This sounds like gibberish.
Yes, this is true. Capitalism, and liberalism (later neo-liberalism) inevitably leads to fascism.
Because everyone owns these things communally. There is no private property, and thus no need for money. There is also no state, so no need for a separated governmental apparatus. The people rule themselves on equal footing, with no class distinctions. And all is made and shared on the principle of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need”.
You need to move past the cold war propaganda that told you communism means big government. Communism means no government.
Nah, Im good. I dont talk to people who show zero candor. Ive said a lot, and if you cant follow then-- tsk!
Answer at least the police use of force issue and if its good Ill probably reply. “Is it good that the State has a monopoly on force?”
Zero candor? Lmao I’ve told you what I thought, haven’t I? I’ve made my points. You don’t understand the left right distinction. That’s what we’re talking about. Your unhinged theories with zero relevance to reality don’t really mean much since they rest on faulty assumptions.
Why are you asking such obvious questions? No, of course it isn’t fucking good. I’m a communist, is this not obvious by now?
It was always obvious, lol. Just trying to get you out the closet, sheesh. Lemmy is hilariously more Commie than Reddit, somehow. You’re pretending to be a radical enlightened centrist, who dont really actually exist. Stop it :p
I dont think you’ve made points, tbh. You showed me a .png, deflected moral questions, and deferred to current state power whenever possible. But we’re getting a lil candor now ;]
If right wing means ‘ultra capitalistic’, and capitalists dont like paying taxes, would it not be fair to assume that right-systems favor low taxes… Can you fund an excessive, wasteful, state on low taxes? Can you fund sweeping tyranny? This is just syllogistic reasoning. Its not some slippery academic nonsense. Im not appealed by authority.
You can say a Commie totally-not-a-state doesnt use money, man. But it will still exist in a world that does. Scarcity will always exist. And thus markets/economies will always exist. Even if they’re black (aka the real free market, lol).
What are you talking about? I haven’t pretended anything, certainly not that.
I’ve made two, which I’ve continued to elaborate on:
Hey! I spent time making that! It roughly describes the left right spectrum. You barely even commented on it.
I’ve answered your questions dude… Wtf are you talking about?
Um, wtf are you talking about? I keep criticisng state power… Are you trolling me?
Yes, and they do. On the rich, anyway.
I’m not the one saying they actually want low taxes. They just want low taxes for the rich, by using either flat tax or very minor progressive taxing.
Why say “totally-not-a-state”? Now you’re the one deferring to state power by assuming it’s necessary. And why should it use money if all goods are freely available?
A world that does what? Use money? Well, if we’re for some reason assuming this end-stage communism has been reached without a global revolution, then methods can be set up for external trade, assuming this hypothetical communist society hasn’t been embargoed by the world for daring to try communism, like has happened to Cuba.
Or invaded, like Vietnam, Argentina, Chile, etc…
Who ever said it didn’t? But we already possess the capability to feed the world and still have some left over. The issue isn’t scarcity, it’s economics.
Economies maybe, but markets aren’t inevitable. They haven’t always existed.
If you’re gonna appeal to the black market as some sort of ideal free market for the world market to aspire to, then I worry that I’ve been taking you far too seriously.
Technically communism should be a moneyless, stateless society. No government to give taxes to. No corporations to take your money. No money to take. No one to force things. It’s all for the people by the people. The idea that you’re pointing to communism as force in order to defend your decision to vote republican on an article about pedophelia is pretty telling. This is why some people assume libertarians want to fuck kids.
Same questions as to the other commenter:
If my [labor] is the peoples’ labor, what recorsue do the people have if I want to horde? Force. What if Im a [widget] maker and the people want [widget]… What happens if Im done from making [widget] and the people still need [widget]? The dynamic of owing the
Statecommunity for yourforcedlabor is pretty… Statist sounding to me.We can talk about theory until we all feel gooey, but it just doesnt seem to go that way. I know, I know. The meme, it’s never been tried, lol.
People doing bad things IS a facet to freedom. People do bad stuff. Do you think selfish animal nature can be regulated away with enough tax? Maybe, but gosh you’ll need a big
communityState.There are just so many mistaken assumptions to correct before I can even touch this question. Let me make an analogy:
To answer this question, I have to take for granted driving licenses can spontaneously change which country they are from. This is absurd, and I hope you can agree that I don’t need to answer what would happen in that case.
Similarly, it is absurd for you to want to hoard in a communist society. With free access to social goods, they will always be there when you want them. What is the point in hoarding?
That’s not how it works.
Okay, so what happens when I dont work but want the peoples’ stuff? Just as you hid your true colors, you are obfuscating all the forseeable places where force WILL be applied. It will be applied somewhere. Maybe it’ll just be me. Should dissidents like me get the bullet? Why not?!
There is a lot of hand-waving here. Like how great things can be. And all I see is Holodimur and One-child policies. Large spying governments with huge militaries taking land from farmers, always followed by famine. But I know, its all really chill on paper. Slick academics make it sound sexy, sure. And Im sure this time we’ll find those chill sociopaths to put at the reigns of power, lol.
You can try to explain it to me, I guess, but this sounds like the most statist worldview imaginable. You’re using an analogy about drivers licenses to a libertarian. Fuck a drivers license. Its just a regulatory device to attach fines to a person. The identification card is not for you, its for them!
You only work if you want to. No one is going to force you. It is natural for people to want to work because we get bored if we don’t. Communists believe in leaving it up to you when you want to work, and what you want to do, and how and where and why. And you can go and take what you need from the freely available goods when you need it.
“For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape. He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.”
- Karl Marx
I never did that.
Such as where?
Why?
Because there is no reason to shoot you just because you don’t enjoy… checks notes being allowed to work or not work when you feel like it.
Such as when?
How is this a hand wave? I have explained above, and you haven’t even responded. This reply here doesn’t even touch any points I’ve made. You’re just repeating yourself.
So, there are a few points to make here. This video goes into a whole lot of detail and is thoroughly sourced and reasoned in a very balanced manner. The TL;DW is:
The soviet famine was largely the result of natural factors.
It was then worsened considerably by a very slow and negligent response from Stalin.
It affected more than just Ukraine. Kazakhstan and even Russia itself also suffered.
Stalin did send help - but not enough, and it was sent secretly so as not to let the outside world discover the famine.
In summation, it was far from deliberate, but Stalin’s response was cold and insufficient, and cared more about appearances.
All in all - not very damn communist. Because, surely you know, The USSR was not communist? The first clue is it has a damn state. That’s a big clue. I’m generally not a big fan of the USSR and the big fuckin state is one of the reasons.
That’s China right? Yeah also another big fuckin state that I’m not a big fan of. Here’s a fellow communist also hatin’ on China.
Yep, things I’m also not a fan of.
Lol wut? Taking land from farmers? Yeah, with communists it’s generally the opposite. If farms are being taken over, it’s from fat cats hoarding land for private use, to be taken into public hands for the use of all.
Yeah, slick academics also make rocket science sound sexy. And then you follow the theories and oh my goodness, you’ve made a fuckin rocket. But if somewhere along the way, you decide to swap out aluminium for styrofoam, you’ve made an expensive waste of fuckin time. So the think is - if you’re trying to make communism and you make a big fuckin state, you’ve taken a wrong fuckin turn or you were fuckin lying!
WHAT FUCKING REIGNS OF POWER? IT’S COMMUNISM! IF THERE ARE REIGNS OF POWER YOU BUILT IT WRONG!
HOW? A stateless society sounds statist? Are you high? Because I am, and it still sounds out there to me.
Did you… miss the point? It’s a prop. Jesus fucking Christ. Oh my God. You’re so hung up on such a small detail that the wider point was completely missed. Let me try again.
In order to answer this question, I have to take for granted that not only can cakes speak, but they also understand what dates are, and might proposition me.
Yes. So fucking what. It doesn’t fucking matter in the context of the analogy. Now think about the damn point it’s making and respond to it you fucking loon.
Well if we want to take the idea of forcing to really anything, then you still want a government, which means rules, which means you are also in favor of forcing. You just want a government run by people volunteer their free time.
And if you want to learn some of the more intricate workings of communism, you can do research. But yes, everyone who can work still does work. Just as your system forces you to work or starve and live on the street.
Turns out every side has somethings that get forced and other things that don’t, because the world isn’t exactly a binary as you suggest. Even the concept of left and right has been broken down more into a square called the political compass. And some even argue you could add another axis for social issues. But at the end of the day, communism would allow freedoms in certain areas, such as it being a stateless society, while yours would mean you get to keep the money and not pay taxes.
And then you show at the end you aren’t even here for a conversation. I never said I was a communist, and I mentioned how communism doesn’t have taxes, and yet you still use it as a come back.
Maybe learn something about these theories before you spout off about them.
Im with you 100% that the existence of a State implies force. I consider myself a Libertarian, as I believe that you can have a good State. But a good State will invariably be a small state. A small state will obviously have less time/resources to do bad stuff. As outlined in the US constitution there are only 3 duties for the federal govt. Yet we find ouselves in a position where half the nation is terrified about what geriatric sits behind what desk. This a symptom of too much top-down unilateral power.
Its also true that I can starve if I do not earn my way. However, employment is voluntary. And I will not be exiled if I want to take time off. Yet its not quite the famines seen by the Ukranians or Mao’s China. Hell, even Deng (Mao’s successor) used Capitalism to turn China into a powerhouse.
Yes, you can choose to starve.