Notices by ☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭ (radical_egocom@mastodon.social), page 9

@aral

All media is biased in favor of the ruling class that controls it, so it is only natural that bourgeois media will be biased in favor of the bourgeoisie and against the proletarians and other workers they oppress both domestically and internationally.

#capitalism #socialism #communism

@Kahte 😽

@johoda

As a Marxist-Leninist, I think it's a good idea to join reformist socialist groups like the DSA (Democratic Socialists of America), not because I agree with their reformism, but because such groups are the perfect places to recruit people into revolutionary Marxism-Leninism. The DSA, SPUSA (Socialist Party USA): all are good breeding grounds for potential recruits. Don't just join. Go to meetings and events, meet with people, and promote Marxism-Leninism to them. #socialism #communism

@KraftTea

Aside from that, there is no instance of a real-world version of the oxymoronic concept of capitalism and socialism coexisting somehow despite being direct opposites of each other. 2/2

@KraftTea

When exactly has socialism and capitalism existed together, as you claim? If you're referring to Nordic Social Democracy, then as I already explained to you in an earlier response, Social Democracy is still capitalism, except with strong regulations and social programs, but those regulations and social programs don't "magically" make the very clearly capitalist economy not capitalist. 1/2

@KraftTea

Did you even read the comment of mine that you screen shot? It's like you made up an argument in your head to argue against instead of the one I sent you. I literally say in the screen shot comment of mine that you made, "A new system (socialism) can, and must, come from the current system (capitalism)," and yet you're arguing as if I said the opposite. Argue against what I actually claim to support next time.

The linked post is advocating for the murder "tankies" (Marxist-Leninist) The post is a meme of a person pointing a gun at three people and saying, "FUCK OFF, FASCISTS!" One of the people at gunpoint says, We are not fashy! We are leftists!" The man holding the gun asks, "What kind of leftists?" The man at gunpoint says, "We are tankies!" What follows is the man holding the gun shooting the people at gunpoint, with the implication that they've been killed. Report, please: https://mastodon.social/@northlove152/113460548588017089

@kaliagainstallodds

"Tankie" is a pejorative used to refer to people who support certain authoritarian socialist states, such as the former Soviet Union, or contemporary countries like China or North Korea, and are often supportive of Marxist-Leninist ideology. And I'm aware of the historical meaning, originating in 1956 when Soviet tanks rolled into Hungary to suppress the uprising, but even then it was used to refer to Marxist-Leninist who supported the Soviet Union.

@kaliagainstallodds

I'm a Marxist-Leninist ("tankie"), and I voted for Harris and tried to convince as many people as possible to vote for her, not because I like her, but because it was either her or Trump, and as bad as Harris is, she would have been less bad for marginalized Americans and leftists than Trump.

@Radical_EgoCom they combine some aspects of socialism with a form of capitalism that is fettered by regulations and laws to avoid their worst excesses.

I'm not suggesting throwing the "socialism" baby out with the bathwater. I always vote socialist because it's the best that's on offer. But I am hoping we can think of something even better.

@lxo

I didn't say there was only one true definition of socialism. My position in the conversation was literally the opposite. @Faket was saying that socialism is reformist and not revolutionary, and I was saying that socialism is not limited to that one definition because socialism can take either a revolutionary or reformist form depending on the particular school of socialism.

@KraftTea

Socialism is the collective ownership of the means of production. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. You can not have both. Either the means of production are public or they're private. Social Democracy (a hybrid of capitalist and socialist components) is still a form of capitalism because it allows private ownership of the means of production, so it and other similar hybrid systems aren't proof that socialism can be created within capitalism. 2/2

@KraftTea @kkarhan

I never said that systems don't change in ways that veer towards the next major shift. I said the exact opposite: "A new system can, and must, come from the current system,...". What I did say is that even though the conditions for the creation of a socialist society can, and must, be created within the current capitalist society, socialism can not be created inside capitalism. Capitalism must be abolished in order for socialism to be created. 1/2

@KraftTea @kkarhan

This reformist argument of your is untenable. A new system can, and must, come from the current system, but it can not be created within the current system, specifically if we're talking about socialism as the new system and capitalism and the current one. The two systems (socialism and capitalism) are antithetical systems that can not exist together. If you want one, you must get rid of the other.

#capitalism #socialism #communism

@rozeboosje

Nordic Social Democracy still maintains the exploitation of the worker through the extraction of surplus value from workers, which prevents workers from acquiring the full value of their labor, which naturally spawns economic inequality, poverty, etc. This will continue as long as the means of production are kept private, and no amount of regulations or laws will change that. The only thing that will change this is by making the means of production publicly owned, i.e., socialism.

@rozeboosje

Why are Nordic Countries "a good example as to why purely ideological socialism isn't enough?"

@rozeboosje

Your definition of "failure" doesn't match the contemporary definition. "Failure" is usually defined as something that has been tried and has failed. Communism as a system has never been implemented, so it's unreasonable to call it a failure as a system. At most, it can be said that people have failed to make it a reality. But more importantly, I didn't propose communism as a solution that can be implemented now. What I propose as a solution is socialism.

@rozeboosje

Socialism and communism have not failed at redistributing wealth equitably. Communism has not been achieved in the modern world, and socialism has many examples of equitable wealth distribution, such as many Nordic countries (which aren't socialist, but incorporate elements of socialism in their capitalist economy (Social Democracy)), Cuba, Venezuela (prior to the economic crisis), and Bolivia.

One way to stave off a #malthusian disaster is to reduce fecundity but all current political frameworks from #communism through #socialism, #liberalism, #capitalism to #farright ideologies are all focused on benefits gained through labour. To avoid a #geriatric holocaust we need to divorce economic progress from individuals' labour, foster self actualisation through art and other non labour focused human self expression so that even those who cannot / can no longer work can benefit. Any ideas?

@rozeboosje

I find this "solution" very problematic and stupid. There is no way to separate economic progress from labor because economic progress is directly tied to labor. Your proposal of reducing birth rates as a solution is Malthusian nonsense. The problem isn't the amount of people there are on earth, it's capitalism that exploit and oppress those people. There could be 500,000 people, but if those people continue to live in an exploitative system, their suffering will still continue.