this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
101 points (98.1% liked)
Meta (lemm.ee)
4091 readers
35 users here now
lemm.ee Meta
This is a community for discussion about this particular Lemmy instance.
News and updates about lemm.ee will be posted here, so if that's something that interests you, make sure to subscribe!
Rules:
- Support requests belong in !support
- Only posts about topics directly related to lemm.ee are allowed
- If you don't have anything constructive to add, then do not post/comment here. Low effort memes, trolling, etc is not allowed.
- If you are from another instance, you may participate in discussions, but remain respectful. Realize that your comments will inevitably be associated with your instance by many lemm.ee users.
If you're a Discord user, you can also join our Discord server: https://discord.gg/XM9nZwUn9K
Discord is only a back-up channel, [email protected] will always be the main place for lemm.ee communications.
If you need help with anything, please post in !support instead.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The struggle with such a standpoint is that both Marxists and Liberals have (to a varying degrees) coherent systems of values and understandings. For Marxists, as an example, Dialectical and Historical Materialism is the baseline, while liberals tend to be more idealist and deny aspects of class struggle. If you agree with either premise, then other conclusions necessarily follow.
Plus, I don't really think labeling Marxists as "auth" makes sense. All states are "auth," as all states are instruments of class oppression, but the class in charge is what makes the biggest impact on how society is run. Liberalism is "auth" as the bourgeoisie rules, Marxism is "auth" as the proletariat rules. It is only by abolishing class that the state can be abolished, and class can only be abolishef by sublimating all forms of property ownership into common, public ownership.
Either way, tangent aside, I recommend finding instances that match your interest, rather than strictly broad federation. Mander.xyz is a great example of an instance based on science, but it also has broad federation. Check Join-Lemmy.
I agree with the points you make. Of course both Marxism and Liberalism is auth to a degree but I think that both the council republic and the single party state are both more directly auth whilst liberal systems tend to be more indirectly auth - through influencing the media & ~~corruption~~ "LoBbYiSm".
Thanks for the mander tip, I might decide between mander and .zip since .zip has broad federation too and multiple frontends and was also recommended a lot.
What do you mean by "directly auth?" If people have a greater degree of political freedom in one party proletarian states than in multiparty states where the bourgeoisie is in control, it seems freedom is greater for more people in the proletarian states. I think the whole "auth" concept is flawed to begin with.
By directly auth I mean that someone with a political interest only needs to have ties to high class party members. By indirectly auth I mean that the same person needs to have ties + smh needs to make sure that the person / person's party actually gets reelected the way Musk has been doing it in the US and the way he has tried to do so in multiple European countries.
And as someone born into a GDR family I could add something to freedom but yeah. We were loyal enough and had someone in the party so we had more freedom than most GDR families... And tbh, life - as long as you were loyal - was, according to my fam, pretty chill with people being nicer because of less stress to compete for shit. They even say now they want socialism back.
The thing is I can be disloyal now, say that I vote for the communists even tho I live in a capitalist society and face no reprocussions even without having political connections. Travel wherever the fuck I want - to North Korea if I want to. So yeah. I want this system of "who tf cares" but without the greedy capitalists and the fucking corrupt opportunists but yeah. I mean the average middle class Chinese can visit capitalist nations so they fixed that problem.
Tbh I have been writing and thinking how to explain myself for so long that my adhd ass brain lost track of what I initially wanted to say...
Ah tldr something like: if peops have the freedom of movement and speech a communist system would be pretty chill but in the past freedom of movement was connected to having someone in the party - at least in the GDR
It's important to contextualize, though. Restrictions of some speech in Socialist countries is usually a defense against outside influences, where Capitalists dominate. Capitalist systems don't appear to restrict speech as much because the only ones that control it are wealthy Capitalists, you can speak out as much as you want but none of that has any power.
Nah, I'm in the middle, I'm not one of those, I agree with Dialectical and Historical Idealism. (/j)
Ok, the historical part is just basic liberalism, but I'm not sure about Dialectical Idealism.
I've been reading a bit of Hegel and authors like Plekhanov's The Significance of Hegel. If liberals genuinely grasped dialectics to the level of Hegel, they'd most likely just be Marxists and drop the idealism. Hegel's thought was a specific product of his conditions and his time, to the point where looking back at him and his thought the jump to Materialism feels obvious, but Marx's advancements were quite revolutionary at the time.
Basically, there are a very small number of people who accept dialectics and follow Hegelian thought over Marxist thought, as compared to Marxism. Would be an interesting stance to take in a world after Marx.