this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
66 points (75.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43891 readers
795 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

However I find myself being disagreed with quite often, mostly for not advocating or cheering violence, "by any means possible" change, or revolutionary tactics. It would seem that I'm not viewed as authentically holding my view unless I advocate extreme, violent, or radical action to accomplish it.

Those seem like two different things to me.

Edit: TO COMMUNISTS, ANARCHISTS, OR ANYONE ELSE CALLING FOR THE OVERTHROW OF SOCIETY

THIS OBVIOUSLY ISN'T MEANT FOR YOU.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 27 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Capitalism is an inherently exploitative system, and only exists because the State enshrines Private Property Rights. Policing in general serves the status quo, which in current society is Capitalist.

Additionally, Communists and Anarchists are regularly murdered by the state, typically internationally, to destabilize this system and maintain corporate profits via super-exploitation.

[โ€“] [email protected] -3 points 4 months ago (5 children)

And what is the future society you propose that is not based on violence, and how are they keeping bad actors from destroying the system that exists afterwards... after capitalism?

[โ€“] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Socialism is not an inherently exploitative system, it's a democratization in the hands of the Workers. Socialism would also not necessitate Imperialism, ie exporting Capital and intentionally underdeveloping countries for cheap foreign labor, which is the modern extreme form of Capitalism.

Policing would be necessary, but rather than existing to maintain classist society, it would exist to maintain classless society.

There's lots of books on the subject, if you want beginner recommendations I can let you know.

[โ€“] [email protected] 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I know this is just a forum and the libs are always confused by nuance, but exploitation does occur in socialist countries, just in a vastly different character and at a much smaller scale. Cuba for instance does have private land owners who employee workers, and China of course has various large corporations.

However these are symptoms of the positions the nations find themselves within. Socialist nations tend to find themselves in the middle of capitalist encirclement. Until the last capitalist is extinguished, class based exploitation will continue to exist.

[โ€“] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago

100% agreed, Socialism is a process that of course will contain leftover remnants from previous society, Communism is the path to eliminating and resolving these contradictions. I was merely trying to be as simplistic and easily digestible as possible for OP.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)