Reading about FOSS philosophy, degoogling, becoming against corporations, and now a full-blown woke communist (like Linus Torvalds)
Omniraptor 5 points 3 years ago
God I wish that were true but there are a LOT of people (well, conservatives) who are vehemently against wider society allowing cross dressing or medical transition. It's not 90% :(
Potatos_are_not_friends 43 points 3 years ago
It's strange to me that any of the things he said is controversial.
spitfire 7 points 3 years ago
I don't think it's that controversial unless you're hardcore conservative. Realistically he just laid out the view of most of the Libertarian party. Nothing he said denotes woke or communist except for the part or him claiming to be one. I'd like to see the full context, because that woke communist comment probably wasn't directed at Linus’ views
ThatHermanoGuy 12 points 3 years ago
Just when I thought I couldn't admire him more...
Holzkohlen 11 points 3 years ago
Common sense on the internet in this economy 😮
PyroNeurosis 6 points 3 years ago
Where do I sign up for my Atheist card?
agent_flounder 3 points 3 years ago
I'm definitely woke af. And proud of it.
I have come to think that when profits are at odds with health, happiness, the good of society and humanity, then either a non profit foundation needs to be running it or it needs to be in the hands of the government—but a much less corrupt one. And I believe oligopolies need to be broken up and anti trust laws greatly expanded and enforced. Then we can deal with the oligopoly / plutocracy. We set a maximum wage (including all earnings) and tax 100% above that. Penalties for regulatory breaches include jail time. For corporations. With corporations reigned in, oligopolies and oligarchies crumbled, we can prevent regulatory capture and corruption. Campaign finance is abolished and it is paid for out of public funds. We abolish first past the post voting in favor of scientifically determined better alternatives to ensure voters actually have a variety of choices.
Idk wtf that makes me except maybe a ranting lunatic lol
cows_are_underrated 4 points 3 years ago
Aber die Grüneeeeeeeeennnnnn!!!!!
TopRamenBinLaden -1 points 3 years ago
I personally think communism especially Marxism sounds really good on paper. The problem is that just about every time it has been attempted things didn't really seem to work like they are supposed to.
Its like every state that attempts communism just ends up being a perpetual Vanguard state, and it ends up being authoritarian and terrible.
I really think there are several good ideas in Marx theories, but the actual implementation of those theories needs some work to figure out how they should be incorporated without being corrupted and overtaken by tyrants.
clover 6 points 3 years ago
Capitalism didn't appear over night. It took several attempts and iterations to get it anywhere near what it is today. Most modern theories on the implementation of Marxism focus less on centralized government authority and more on democracy in the work place, and eliminating 3rd party shareholders' control. Much of the struggle with implementation of this, is that the existing financial structures aren't set up to handle this type of thing well.
rq0_0 1 point 3 years ago
What we have today isn't really even capitalism anymore. It is becoming something else. We don't have free markets, for example, because large corporate players are not allowed to fail. Under a central banking system, the state can simply print money to fund its corporate protectorates while artificially suppressing interest rates to avoid paying any interest on the debt. And then we use tariffs and policy to pick and choose winners, suppressing competition. This is about as far from capitalism as one can imagine.
clover 1 point 3 years ago
Can you point me to a time when capitalism did happen? Where governments and outside forces weren't picking winners and losers in the market? In such a time what was the plight of the common worker? Did we see overwork, workplace safety, and child labor issues?
Third wave communism doesn't seek to abandon the "free market" (which is free within bounds), it instead favors democracy in the workplace. Where all members of the organization are employee-owners including ceos and middle management and the "Board" is dissolved into either a representative or direct democracy made up of employee-owners. In this way one increases the incentives for each individual to perform and see the company perform well. This also mitigates much income inequality by allowing the workers a say in the compensation of middle and upper management.
rq0_0 1 point 3 years ago
I personally think communism especially Marxism sounds really good on paper. The problem is that just about every time it has been attempted things didn’t really seem to work like they are supposed to.
Boy, that's the understatement of the century. Not only did it not work, it often results in mass murder and the ushering in of a totalitarian regime.
cows_are_underrated 0 points 3 years ago
You're right. Communism is like the greatest social form a society can possibly achieve. The Problem is, that humans are dumb and will always try to get the best out of it for themselves so the concept of communism is ruined by those people. It maybe is practicable in small "society's" (your family as example) but fails in big societies like states.
anarchotaoist 1 point 3 years ago
Yes, Communism fails to acknowledge human psychology and will therefore never work. People are individuals with self interests. This can never be controlled (without violence) by a socialist/communist society. The good news is you only need selfishness in a free market society. In order for people to get their needs met they need to offer value. Value exchange means all people are better off (on average).
the_lone_wolf 0 points 3 years ago
That's why no country has achieved communism they are all authoritarian!
thanksforallthefish 107 points 3 years ago
Context for those who are baffled (I was)
No Linus hasn't grabbed a red rag and isn't off to foment revolution
AnUnusualRelic 35 points 3 years ago
I liked the take by the utterly clueless Polish guy in the comment. I think his complete lack of understanding of any context is quite typical of online political conversation, especially when semantics come into play.
Also Linus did call for "Total world domination" (I have the tshirt).
sneaky_b45tard 12 points 3 years ago
Yes of course, who doesn't remember how woke Lenin created a woke revolution based on woke teachings of woke Marx and even woker Engels.
chaorace 6 points 3 years ago
This might be a dumb question: what do you mean? I know very little about Finland, so I'm just genuinely curious. Are the Finns in particular well-known for being anti-communist or is it more like a geopolitical thing since they share a border with Russia?
teemuki 10 points 3 years ago
I don't know where this idea that all Finns are anti-communist comes from. Finland had one of the strongest communist movements in Western Europe during the cold war. At the height of their popularity about one in four Finns voted for communists in elections. Card carrying communists sat as ministers in multiple cabinets, up to the early 1980s. Like many young people of his generation, Linus Torvalds' father was a member of the Communist Party of Finland in the 1970s. And all this happened after Finland had fought against the Soviet Union in the 2nd world war.
chaorace 1 point 3 years ago
Fair enough, I suppose. Sometimes it's hard to tease out cause & effect with things like this (e.g.: the relationships between Germany/France, U.S./Japan, Canada/U.K.). Not that I mind a simple & straightforward bloody historical hate-boner every once in a while.
ensignrick 18 points 3 years ago
I just installed pop!_os am I safe?
krimsonbun 32 points 3 years ago
that's how I started. nobody's safe.
Resolved3874 7 points 3 years ago
As someone who recently fell in love with EndeavorOS I don't wanna fall down the cat girl pipeline....
cows_are_underrated 5 points 3 years ago
It's to late brother. It's to late.
Resolved3874 5 points 3 years ago
uWu
RiikkaTheIcePrincess 5 points 3 years ago
:3 ^.^
cows_are_underrated 3 points 3 years ago
Well, I'm probably fucked then. I even have Arch on my gaming PC with KDE and Arch on my school laptop with GNOME(Gnome for Laptops is insanely cool)
ConfusedLlama 59 points 3 years ago
rant:
I have been using Linux since 2006, a lefty and against the super-rich and big corporations since I remember (to the point of avoiding their products like the plague), also never having understood or accepted gender roles and other stupid traditional concepts, yet never turned into a communist 🤷
It baffles me that so many people think that respecting gender equality, understanding the evil in big corporations and avoiding them, valuing community and being tolerant (except for intolerance) and against discrimination somehow equals communism... I say this because I've been called a communist by many people who know me, while I have always rejected it explicitly!
/rant
QwertySpace 15 points 3 years ago
What economic model do you believe in?
ConfusedLlama 9 points 3 years ago
I can't really say I believe in a specific model, but to my knowledge, and for the current version of our world, welfare states seem to be doing the least worse currently. But really, I think our world is kinda too fucked up right now to be able to have any good social-economic system (in terms of maximum equality and minimum suffering, I guess.)
Ideally, I'd prefer no state, only local communities managing themselves (something like city states, maybe?) and their relations to other communities... but I know it's just a dream, at least for the foreseeable future, considering the current realities and the ass-people in power. Because that would need many really peaceful, non-greedy and non-selfish people, which... well, never mind.
P.s. Sorry for the pessimism, and I might be wrong of course, which I really hope I am.
ConfusedLlama 6 points 3 years ago
Thanks. Maybe, kind of. My knowledge on the topic is limited, but I think communalism (or some version of it) could involve some form of loyalty to one's ethnic group or community, which absolutely disagree with.
Social responsibility: Yes. But loyalty, especially towards something ultimately meaningless such as ethnicity: No.
My values are respecting individual choices, rights and well-being of others (which also entails some responsibility).
Not_mikey 13 points 3 years ago
local communities managing themselves (something like city states maybe?) and their relations to other communities
Your describing a Soviet you filthy commie.
But for real what your describing is communism as marx originally thought of it. The one example marx gave as a model for what communism would be was the Paris commune which adheres to a lot of what you said. Most leftist agree that that's the end goal it's just a matter of how to get there. Lenin originally pitched the Soviet Union as just that, a bunch of local councils(soviets) freely cooperating and making there own rules. He saw how the Paris commune's openness and military indecisiveness led to it being brutally suppressed though and wanted an interim top down dictatorship and rapid brutal industrialization to handle this threat. The threat never went away though, first with the Nazis almost annihilating them then the u.s. pointing nukes at them, so neither did the dictatorship.
Their end goal was still avowedly the same though, and communism, to me at least, is about that goal. Their are a bunch of different theoretical paths to it, and there's tonnes of infighting as to which ones the best, but all communists agree that the commune/Soviet/city state should have all the power.
ConfusedLlama 3 points 3 years ago
Thanks for the explanation.
The problem is exactly the "how", as you described. And personally, I don't really have any idea, since all the possible ways seem to involve somehow contradicting that goal "temporarily" (by using violence, limiting individual liberties, etc.), which I don't like. I think maybe over time, (a very long time, perhaps?) the way of thinking of human societies will slowly (and through a painful process) shift to that direction (and maybe not! who knows!).
Either way, life is painful and world is cruel.
jlh 0 points 3 years ago
Lenin did not seize absolute power out of some lofty ideal of protecting the workers. He was very motivated about reclaiming the Russian Empire and murdering any workers or separatists that were in his way. Even contemporary communists like Rosa Luxembourg recognized that. Lenin and Stalin had over 20 years to dismantle the state before the Nazis became a threat. Not to mention, the original plan was to ally with the Nazis! The leaders never had any interest in helping workers.
jlh 1 point 3 years ago
That's pretty similar to the social democratic system that they had in Sweden before the 90s. Many critical services were government agencies, such as the railroad, the phone network, and the pharmacies. Health care and rental housing were handled by the municipality or the county.
bennieandthez 15 points 3 years ago
Id recommend you reading "socialism: utopian and scientific" by Engels. Because to me you sound exactly like the utopian socialist of the past.
doom_and_gloom 10 points 3 years ago path: 0 3804058 3811469, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 0
agent_flounder -1 points 3 years ago
Sounds a lot like me. That's not communism, that's just being a decent person. One that respects others and just wants everyone to live a good life without being the target of hate and harassment.
schnurrito 51 points 3 years ago
Linus Torvalds is a "full-blown woke communist"? Citation needed.
I have been a FOSS enthusiast since my preteen or early teenage years (mid-to-late 2000s), yet I am not in any sense a communist.
RegalPotoo 49 points 3 years ago
"full-blown woke communist" is US-speak for "Scandinavian socialist"
DragonTypeWyvern 26 points 3 years ago
The term you want is social democrat, which isn't socialism but hey, it tries to like, stop people starving to death on the street, if only because it looks ugly.
bennieandthez 17 points 3 years ago
Nah literally anyone who advocates for basic human rights is a "full blown woke communist".
anarchotaoist -1 points 3 years ago
Did you know the Scandanavian countries have more economic freedom than the USA! Its their saving grace. They also have many private roads. The early 20th c saw capitalist Nordic countries become very wealthy and store up sovereign funds. These funds were than blown dry in the later half of the century as they became more socialist. They have now abandoned many socialist policies and again adopted freedom. They do however still have high taxation.
frezik 17 points 3 years ago
His dad was a straight up member of the Finnish Communist Party. He's still alive, and is even a member of the European Parliament, but seems more liberal/centrist these days.
Linus himself seems to be pretty mum on politics.
bear 45 points 3 years ago
sudo apt-get install anarchism
backhdlp 11 points 3 years ago
AUR package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/anarchism
(the pkgbuild is literally just extracting the deb and archiving it again to an arch package lol)
citrusface 38 points 3 years ago
...I just didn't want windows advertising to me.
Sarcasmo220 9 points 3 years ago
But that is sort of why it's the first step. You were using Windows and were bothered with ads. So you may have looked into an alternative you heard about called Linux. You are new to Linux and maybe ask some questions on forums and interact with people from all over the world that are taking time out of their day to help you, which gives you a sense of community. Then you learn that Linux is licensed as Open Source Software, and that people are working together to create something for the benefit of people, not for profits. Then you start to wonder, what else in my life that bothers me is a result of profit motivation?
icepuncher69 36 points 3 years ago
Fine, but dont defend tyranical regimes. They are bad no mather who they say they read. They could could claim to be following the teachings of fucking Mr Roggers but if they have concentration camps then thats not utopic or very humanitarian in my opinion, specially if ther is some mad dictator in power with everything no matter how manny extra steps are in between.
thebrownhaze 34 points 3 years ago
On Lemmy? Shock
Koffiato 1 point 3 years ago
Seriously. I just can't escape. I think it's nice to have people who support xism while also having people that support yism and zism, as it creates a healthy environment where we can discuss things throughly; since each member will see, recognize, and interpret what they see differently and possibly contribute more.
Vast majority of Lemmy users are in the same demographic which barely provides differing opinions so there's basically nothing to discuss (apart from things do not sit well with said demographic).
I really do hope this platform somehow attracts users from every ideology much like Tildes.
tal 31 points 3 years ago
https://moneyinc.com/linus-torvalds-net-worth/
How Linus Torvalds Achieved a Net Worth of $150 Million
Red Hat and VA Linux went public, and since they acknowledged it would not have been possible without the programmer, Torvalds received shares reportedly worth $20 million. Before it went public, Red Hat had allegedly paid Torvalds $1 million in stock, which the programmer claims was the only big payout he received.
He revealed that the rest of the stock Transmeta and another Linux startup awarded him were not worth much by the time he could sell them. However, in the case of his Red Hat stock, it must have been worth his while because, in 2012, Red Hat became the first $1 billion open-source company when it reached the billion-dollar mark in annual revenue.
Whether he exercised his stock options is unclear, but the money he makes from the gains could be the reason why his net worth has continued to soar.
Well, that's one definition of being communist, I suppose. Myself, I think that it's fairly safe to say that Torvalds is okay with private ownership of industry.
spookedbyroaches 24 points 3 years ago
People may have read this and got too excited. He just believes in socially left policy. He's probably not a communist.
nadir 19 points 3 years ago
I'm no communist, but your argument is flawed.
Linus is not representative of the Linux community and I think the famous Stallman rant regarding GNU/Linux is actually relevant here.
The free software movement is certainly pretty left leaning, though I wouldn't call them communist.
RedWizard 7 points 3 years ago
Mr. Parenti, are you a Marxist?
Parenti: This is my answer. I would wear that label proudly if I knew that you understood what I meant by Marxist. And when someone says: 'You're a Marxist now aren't you?' and their only intention is to give a buzzword which says 'this guy drinks the blood of capitalist children' or something, then I'm going to say no, I'm not your label, I don't particularly want your label.
[...] Look, I wrote the book about the media. I don't know what Karl Marx has to say about 20th-century US media, I think he had very little to say because you know... he left early. But there's been a lot of creative thought and scholarship in Marxist literature and I feel that it's a scholasticist thing [to say]: 'Oh, you took your [Marxist] formula and applied it here....'
See, I don't see these things this way because I'm a Marxist. it's just the opposite. I started seeing these things and I started realizing that there was an analysis that had explanatory power for that. It gets very frustrating you know. For years I'd knock myself out trying to make an analysis, I'd come to the conclusion and I'd say: 'Hey you know, the police are not neutral, they're on the side of property and power.' Then someone would say to me: 'That's Marxism, you know, you're sounding like a Marxist.'
That's Marxism... oh. Then I'd say: 'Wealth is largely unaccountable in many of the things it does in our democracy, I don't understand, that isn't what I learned ... ' / 'Oh that's a Marxist point of view, Marx said that you know.' and it would go on, one thing after another and I said:
'Boy, this Karl Marx was really something, you know, every time I put two and two together and come up with an analysis they give him the credit for it.'
jeremyparker 15 points 3 years ago
There's a gaping and dangerous misunderstanding in there. Having money or being successful under capitalism doesn't mean you don't see its flaws. The idea that rich people can't be communists is like saying that only gay people can support gay rights.
Believing that the world would be a better place if we pooled our resources has nothing to do with whether you created an operating system that all of global computing relies on.
finnie 7 points 3 years ago
I don't even think the meme is about communism as much as it is just venting about how corps turned free-software into the panopticon it is today.
But Idc if Torvalds is a Marxist bc I'm not either, but marx wrote about how the proletariat should own stocks, so that isn't even disqualifying tho.
And tbh I think most "marxists" just adopt that term because our political discourse is so corrupted that anyone who thinks that we shouldn't curb-stomp an Amazon employee for wanting a bathroom break is treated like they're Mao anyway.
cloudy1999 2 points 3 years ago
I had to look up the panopticon reference, so I thought to share with others: 'A proposed prison of supervision, so arranged that the inspector can see each of the prisoners at all times without being seen by them: proposed by Jeremy Bentam.'
Commiunism 28 points 3 years ago
Literally same, even the years match up lol
theWizard200 16 points 3 years ago
Me too
ZombieMantis 46 points 3 years ago
My brother in Christ Comrade in the revolution, Communism is a stateless, moneyless, classless society. Whatever self-proclaimed "Statist Communists" thare are, are no-more Communist than the National "Socialists" who sent our kind to the death camps.
archomrade 5 points 3 years ago
But that's doesn't just appear from nothing.
Yea I think that's kinda their point
jeremyparker 1 point 3 years ago
Personally while I think all states should be abolished and all resources should be shared on a global scale, I also think that the company that serves my house with Internet should be forced to compete so that we (the people in my city) can get the benefits of capitalism: improved prices and service.
I also believe that the latter is actually a step towards the former - though it's just a guess.
Rumo 22 points 3 years ago
Anarchism does not necessarily exclude Communism! :)
Good Explanations: https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html for those interested
anarchotaoist 4 points 3 years ago
FLOSS is Voluntaryism - it only requires voluntary participation.
voidMainVoid 1 point 3 years ago
How so?
TalkingCat 1 point 3 years ago
Eh, depends on the project
AnanasMarko 1 point 3 years ago
Disagree. If FOSS were an anarchism what would be the point of FOSS lincences of which some are very long legal documents? Also corporations would just take your code, say its theirs and tell you to go fuck yourself.
SailorMoss 13 points 3 years ago
Foss licenses are copyleft, they bar individuals from enclosing the commons built by the collective for profit. Anarchism isn’t just letting people do whatever they want. Anarchism means against hierarchy. Having rules that prevent unjustified hierarchies from forming is entirely with in the bounds of anarchism. Including rules that prevent using copyright as a coercive hierarchy.
Robaque 5 points 3 years ago
All heirarchies are unjustified.
I'd look at foss licenses more as tools of defence against (and within) the current system/context than "rules" that serve to enforce some kind of anti-capitalist "heirarchy".
AnanasMarko 2 points 3 years ago
Honest question: "Without any authority who gets to enforce the rules?". Everyone, as they see fit it seems. What makes "your" hierarchy better than "my" hierarchy?
Sarcasmo220 7 points 3 years ago
Everyone sort of enforces the rules as they see fit now. The difference is there is an expectation to not resist when someone is abusing their power because they are an authority figure. Under anarchism, it is your peers holding each other accountable, and your right to question actions against you is accepted.
anarchotaoist 1 point 3 years ago
I look at it the other way. In a free and prosperous armed society where common sense rules are respected and insisted upon by the majority who would be stupid enough to break the rules? Let us look at it some other ways. Ebay is one of the largest merchant structures in the world. It is not an authority, but has for decades now used in-house arbitration for disputes. Detroit has a private 'police force'. It is not an authority. It is a private defence org that also runs a volunteer community protection unit that uses psychology as its main policing tool. Historically we had Panarchy in Ireland. People regardless of territory could voluntarily join a tuath. It would offer legal services. If unsatisfactory the client could join another tuath. Even today way much more is spent on private security than on policing. Maratine law orignally ran on banishment. Did not pay your contract or larder bill. You could no longer dock your ship or be served at a tavern etc. Before the state co-opted the law, there was Common Law! Law does not require authority.
anarchotaoist 2 points 3 years ago
Copyleft is NOT against profit! Go read Stallman! Anarchy mean 'No Rulers' not no hierarchy. Call yourself an Anorderist otherwise! Hierarchy is just a form of structure. Some people have management and coordination skills. Others specialise in an area that fits into a greater project. There is nothing wrong in a voluntary structure system. It is only the initiation of force upon structure (see. Government) or otherwise that is a problem.
ohitsbreadley 11 points 3 years ago
Tell me you don't understand anarchism without telling me you don't understand anarchism.
anarchotaoist 1 point 3 years ago
Government is when an involuntary institution has a mafia protection racket. They show up after a crime and write a report. Anarchism is when you take responsibility for your own protection.
Koffiato 19 points 3 years ago
What? These things are not related to each other by a good margin. In fact, since the FOSS is completely orderless, it goes against communism; which requires some sort of order just to be able to function. But either way, the parallel is not there or questionable at best, not to mention irrelevant.
Can we NOT drag useless politics into FOSS?
HubertManne 17 points 3 years ago
Wow. Im pretty centerist on capitalism and I have been using linux since about 2000 or so.
shaked_coffee 11 points 3 years ago
path: 0 3821138 3822309, hotness: undefined, score: 11, children: 1
(/s in case it wasn't clear)
cynetri 16 points 3 years ago
I still find it funny that Steve Ballmer called Linux communism lmao
xxx69MyImmortal69xxx 16 points 3 years ago
Shit this is too accurate
SaltyIceteaMaker 16 points 3 years ago
I feel called out.
I'm not quite there yet but im definitly at the second to last block
beejjorgensen 15 points 3 years ago
Use the right tool for the job, I say.
I made a decent chunk of change with capitalism. I have a modest house and am well positioned for a middle-class retirement.
Now I work for the government in a field for which I find the capitalist options wanting.
I give away my programming guides for free online with no ads, but sell paper copies of the books for profit.
Could I make more money by charging for the online versions? Sure. But some things are worth more than money.
The quest for money doesn't ruin everything, but it sure ruins a lot of things.
Bell Labs of yore would be my dream company to work for.
the_lone_wolf 2 points 3 years ago
What's your website?
beejjorgensen 1 point 3 years ago
path: 0 3813751 3826464 3828685, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1
the_lone_wolf 1 point 3 years ago
🤗 love your articles
anarchotaoist 14 points 3 years ago
Eric Raymond, Communism and Free Software Eric Raymond, Communism and Free Software
PipedLinkBot 3 points 3 years ago
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://youtu.be/69ZyX5sN2NA?si=Zc_eZsFid48qS-Um&t=39
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
stepanzak 14 points 3 years ago
Yeah, I love the FOSS philosophy and I would be a communist if I didn't know that in my country and in every other country where communism is/was, it became a dictatorship doing reallly horrible things. I simply don't have the trust in people to believe communism is possible without violation of human rights. It's sad.
stepanzak 8 points 3 years ago
Sorry then, I should have written In every other country ruled by communists saying they are building communism, banning every other political party then the communist one, killing people in the name of communism. I see their unability to achieve communism even when they've had full control over country for decades as a proof of that it's not really possible.
Shatur -1 points 3 years ago
It is incorrect to say that there was/is communism in the country. There are only countries that trying/tried building communism.
In every other country ruled by communists saying they are building communism, banning every other political party then the communist one, killing people in the name of communism
Having a single party is the one of several approaches. But the only one that survived. I think the idea is that you don't need other parties if you building communism (like why do you need any liberal party driven by rich people?). And It's not like regular people can't join this party (unlike now when only rich people can be in politics).
proof of that it’s not really possible.
I’m not saying that it’s possible, but I wouldn’t say that it’s impossible given a certain level of technology.
ConfusedLlama 4 points 3 years ago
Then what is it? A teapot in the sky?
If it's a viable plan which can be realized, then how to achieve it, without killing people and creating a dictatorship? Is it possible?
I might be wrong, but it seems to me that any effort to establish communism will eventually fail with a lot paid in vain, and many lives lost, as has happened so far.
If that viable plan needs time to be accepted more widely, then maybe we should simply wait and try to be decent people in the meantime, instead of trying now to establish a "temporary" dictatorship actively as a way of "transition". And if the plan can be acted upon right now, then again the question is how (without resorting to violence and tyranny, of course). That question remains open to me. And it's a big one.
Shatur 3 points 3 years ago
Then what is it? A teapot in the sky?
In such countries there was/is socialism. They only tried/trying to build communism. This is a common misconception.
If it’s a viable plan which can be realized, then how to achieve it, without killing people and creating a dictatorship? Is it possible?
I don't know. But I doubt that the state will give up its powers without any fight.
tdawg 4 points 3 years ago
My understanding is that these days people treat it more like an ideal to strive toward under current democratic systems. For instance, how would you feel about UBI being introduced under your current system of governance?
fishinthecalculator 9 points 3 years ago
No. They are not equal and neither same. If you understand Italian I suggest you to search for Prof. Barbero videos on the topic. They are quite better than anything I'll be able to convey.
Fascism:
It's an authoritarian dictatorship happened between 1914 and 1945 in Italy. The fascist regime and ideology was strictly based on Mussolini's figure, people marched in straight lines down the streets, everyone wearing the same uniforms and Italy was a great imperialist nation (lol jk it wasn't but they quite believed it). Fascism and the fascist party stopped existing after partisans overthrew the regime. Fascism is a 20 years long dictatorship. After that there were some regimes around the world that were inspired by Mussolini such as the current ruling party Italy Fratelli d'Italia, Marine le Pen's party in France, those shitty AFD in Germany, orban's Regime, franco in Spain etc etc. They are called neofascists, because Fascism was a 20 years long regime happened in Italy between 1914 and 1945.
Communism:
Communism is a model of governace that's never been achieved in human history, as someone above said it's about classless, stateless, governance models. It's been around for like 200 years (the Communist Party Manifesto is from 1848), and in every country of the world there is/ has been a Communist Party and as we know they were always persecuted for being communist, stopped from going to the government and stopped from bulding a classless society when they managed to get to govern. Just see what the USA did in the last 50/60 years in every country that risked a communist government: Chile and latin America in general, Italy and so on an so forth.
Fascism =/= communism, and if you say the contrary you just don't know how they work.
fishinthecalculator 0 points 3 years ago
Like third grade history I believe
Urist 5 points 3 years ago
In the absence of an answer I would just like to remind you that dbzer0 seems to not be the place for you. Maybe fascists cannot read very well, but on the signup screen it says explicitly:
Note that this is an anarchist server. If you start promoting right-wing rhetoric, expect to be banned.
I do not think you should feel very welcome here at all. Maybe just leave Lemmy altogether?
ComradeChairmanKGB 10 points 3 years ago
stepanzak -15 points 3 years ago
I live in the central europe and I have plenty of historical data about every country that was part of the Soviet Union being authoritarian at the same time. You probably couldn't imagine what was happening here. I don't have so much knowledge about the rest of the world, but I think I heard about some genocide and concentration camps in china recently...
naeap 13 points 3 years ago
Just wait for the next stage as a libertarian socialist, without a leading communist party, because we can take care of us ourselves - it's usually called anarchy (which doesn't mean no social norms, just self-organisation without leadership)
foreverandaday 12 points 3 years ago
relatable
shirro 9 points 3 years ago
I don't really see the link to communism though I can see the parallels to social democracy.
Private ownership of computer code should lead us to a hellscape where all code is owned by a handful of huge companies and wealthy elites. But instead of doing away with private ownership and making all code public domain we added regulation in the form of free and open source licensing that democratized private ownership and made it serve our community. Perhaps that is the real lesson, not communism.
TheBeege 23 points 3 years ago
In pointing out one's deficiencies, you should help them fill in those gaps. Otherwise, you're just being an asshole.
Explain what communism is. Comprehensive education in communism is not part of many places' standard curriculum
OrteilGenou 7 points 3 years ago
Thank you for the useless opinion vomit
OrteilGenou 3 points 3 years ago
More vapid nonsense
Say something, or don't bother hitting keys
Imnebuddy 8 points 3 years ago
For me, it was around 2015ish when I first installed Linux after learning about it from someone that was detasselling in a corn field with me. Then around 2017-2020ish, I eventually became radicalized (2017 is when net neutrality was killed, even though around 80% of Americans supported it, which made me question our government and economy).
Imnebuddy 6 points 3 years ago
I am not sure if you meant to reply to the other person's comment or refer to them in mine, but I think this video does a pretty good job at explaining socialism/communism to people wanting to understand it: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=fpKsygbNLT4
I'll try to give my own explanations later.
Thorned_Rose 2 points 3 years ago
Second Thought is so good!
peotr26 8 points 3 years ago
I believe you are not alone. I have the exact same journey. Started installing Ubuntu 20.04 on a mid-2011 iMac. Now, I consider myself as a near-libertarian communist, I spend my free time reading books on communist theory.
chemicalwonka 8 points 3 years ago
This meme shows completely my journey. I became a FOSS advocate in 2020 after realized that all sites that I visited wanted my "cookies". I started to questioning myself about and after some research I became a disciple of Richard Stallman and a Marxist-Leninist.
mr_MADAFAKA 8 points 3 years ago
So Steve Ballmer was right all along
hackitfast 11 points 3 years ago
Developers, developers?
bennieandthez 20 points 3 years ago
Neither do the anti-marxists.
Vinegar 14 points 3 years ago
Karl Marx was a philosopher and economist. He wanted to understand class relations and social conflict, so he developed theories to explain why things are the way they are. A Marxist uses Marx's theories to understand why the world is the way it is.
Marx had a lot of theories, such as historical materialism - that all history was primarily motivated by socio-economic forces, not supernatural forces or grand conspiracy. Marx wrote that the dominate socio-economic system running the world in his time was capitalism/imperialism which fueled capital accumulation through exploitation and alienation, and used technology to further this process with imperialist wars for resources etc... He also focused on class struggle between those with the most resources, and those with the fewest resources - the bourgeoisie (capitalists) vs. the proletariat (workers/peasants).
Marx went further than trying to explain why the world is the way it is, he also theorized on how humanity could replace the dominate socio-economic system, and what a non-exploitative non-alienating socio-economic system might look like. "Marxist" refers to anyone who believes Marx's theories are valid and uses them to understand the way things are.
Moobythegoldensock 9 points 3 years ago
Marxism is the classical version of communism developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. As opposed to later ideologies such as Marxism-Leninism and Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
polskilumalo 12 points 3 years ago
Marxism isn't some magical dogma, it's a set of tools for analyzing the world and a vision of a better future that came from the use of these tools and the analysis they gave. Marxism-Leninism and MLM are both to an extent a use of these tools to further analyzing the world.
Without Lenin we wouldn't have a good analysis of Imperialism and methods for theory application to the real world. Ala vanguard party and all that.
demonsword 6 points 3 years ago
you can read about that here if you've got a few minutes to spare
Spaceinv8er -2 points 3 years ago
The people who tried to explain it to you, cant even it explain it themselves lol
OurToothbrush -1 points 3 years ago
path: 0 3805081 3809209 3810029 3812860, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 0
KillAllPoorPeople 10 points 3 years ago
Socialism isn't communism-lite. It's more of an umbrella anti-capitalist term.
lemba 4 points 3 years ago
Follow the white rabbit: https://lemmy.world/post/5739196
bennieandthez 11 points 3 years ago
Read lenin, not yannis.
GodofGrunts -7 points 3 years ago
Read lenin
Guess we're just mask off Tankies on Lemmy huh?
bennieandthez 7 points 3 years ago
Am i supposed to feel ashamed? 😂
GodofGrunts -2 points 3 years ago
Absolutely
OurToothbrush 6 points 3 years ago
Okay McCarthy
GodofGrunts -3 points 3 years ago
Couldn't care less about regular communists. Tankies on the other hand...
bunkyprewster 2 points 3 years ago
I thought Tankie meant Stalinist not just Leninist.
GodofGrunts 0 points 3 years ago
Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to communists who express support for one-party communist regimes that are associated with Marxism–Leninism, whether contemporary or historical.
Basically those "communist" who they should be in charge of the "transitional" period into a stateless society.
OurToothbrush -2 points 3 years ago
There really isn't anyone who is a stalinist, Stalin had some important theoretical contributions but not enough to have a branch of thought, he followed lenin's ideas pretty much.
doom_and_gloom 4 points 3 years ago path: 0 3809740 3811285, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 0
clanginator 3 points 3 years ago
Honestly I definitely credit the FOSS community as a whole for helping me become anti-corporate and eventually leftist, and helping me escape religion.
I first installed Linux in middle school, 15 years ago. I began appreciating other people wanting to share something for the benefit of others, with nothing in return (and no religion attached).
And from there it was a slow burn of becoming more and more leftist. I went vegan 5 years ago, and since then really started embracing leftism more.
I only recently though noticed the link between FOSS and leftism, but in hindsight it's so obvious.
xarexyouxmadx 3 points 3 years ago
In my experience I've noticed Linux tends to (disproportionately) attract both libertarians and socialists/communists. I feel like I run into more of both within the Linux community than I do in other communities.
I started using Linux because I couldn't force myself to use Windows 8. Up to that point I used whatever version of Windows came right before the graphical interface but 8 was too awful so I started playing with mint and never went back..
I got off the capitalism train in the middle of that but that was only because I decided to major in business and when I saw how the sausage was made I jumped ship but I didn't know anything about socialism or communism or marxism or whatever you want to call it. I was so not into politics or economics that I literally had to search the Internet and ask people on social media what was an alternative to the crap I was reading for my classes.. And then I went down that rabbit hole. If was enlightening. I learned a lot.
Also... for people who think college is Marxist indoctrination...Marx was brought up for one paragraph in one book at the very very end of my 4 years. But by that point I already knew who he was just from the rabbit hole I went down when I was curious for some alternative to what I was being taught.
Kidplayer_666 3 points 3 years ago
For me it was more of a: went from centrist to we need better regulations but we must ensure competition.
StaySquared 1 point 2 years ago
Am I doing it wrong because I've use Ubuntu (12 years) and Kali Linux (8 years) and... I'm still not a marxist?
yogthos 0 points 3 years ago
Linux and open source in general completely blow apart capitalist arguments that profit motive is necessary for innovation and technological advancement. Open source ecosystem primarily run by volunteers has produces some of the most interesting and innovative technologies that we've seen. The reality is that people make interesting things because they're curious and they enjoy making stuff. Pretty much nobody makes anything interesting with profit being the primary motive.
zabadoh 0 points 3 years ago
I disagree somewhat.
A lot of high tech development comes with a greed motive, e.g. IPO, or getting bought out by a large company seeking to enter the space, e.g. Google buying Android, or Facebook buying Instagram and Oculus.
And conversely, a lot of open source software are copies of commercially successful products, albeit they only become widely adopted after the originals have entered the enshittified phase of their life.
Is there a Lemmy without Reddit? Is there a Mastodon without Twitter? Is there LibreOffice without Microsoft Office and decades of commercial word processors and spreadsheets before that? Or OpenOffice becoming enshittified for that matter? Is there qBittorrent without uTorrent enshittified? Is there postgreSQL without IBM's DB2?
The exception that I can see is social media and networked services that require active network and server resources, like Facebook YouTube, or even Dropbox and Evernote.
Okay, The WELL is still around and is arguably the granddaddy of all online services, and has avoided enshittification, but it isn't really open source.
yogthos 0 points 3 years ago
The idea that these things wouldn't exist without commercial analogs is silly. You do realize that things like BBS boards and IRC existed long before commercial social media platforms right? In fact, we might've seen things like social media evolve in completely different directions if not for commercial platforms setting standards based on attracting clicks, and monetizing users.
plutolink -2 points 3 years ago
This is the Linux content I was looking for. So relevant and insightful to Linux itself. Like, wow, this is so much better and so much less insufferable than Reddit’s userbase, amirite, guys? It’s so refreshing seeing the same ideology leaking into literally every community, the diversity is so nice to see, like, wow, yes.
anarchotaoist -5 points 3 years ago
Interesting because libertarians are for FOSS as they are against IP. (It is not real property). Libertarians also like to degoogle as they like privacy. Libertarians are against corporations as they are not a free market creation.
UnknownQuantity 17 points 3 years ago
Well, there are Libertarians and libertarians. From your username I gather you're a Libertarian and not just a GOP moron libertarian who might hate corporations but will defend their "right" not to be regulated, while receiving government subsidies.
wildbus8979 15 points 3 years ago
Libertarians are against corporations
(American) Libertarianism was literally created by Milton Freedman under contract and for the benefit of oil corporations. Claiming libertarians are against corporations is the dumbest fucking take.
They couldn't come up with an original thought to save their lives, even the name itself was stolen from French (libertaire) anarchism which had to hide it's original name after publication bans.
anarchotaoist -3 points 3 years ago
Re: your link Some libertarians are practical. If governments have changed the playing field, widened the posts for example, you do not only aim at the original legitimate space. You are at a disadvantage and will loose. You adjust to the game and try to change it. So, allegedly, FEE took money from big businesses. So what? This is not an endorsement of the CORPORATION! If they took tax extorted it would be a red flag. Freedman - guilty of what? Removing rent controls! Manipulation, coercion of a market! nb Libertarians follow Austrian economics BTW.
anarchotaoist -4 points 3 years ago
Nice story, but Libertarians want liberty - huh! Liberty is the absence of coercion. Corporations are a forced manipulation, intrusion & coercion upon a free market. They have government granted limited liability, send lobbyists to manipulate rules in their favour and create regulatory capture to lock out smaller competitors. Competition is part of a free market - which libertarians want! Facts! Libertarianism was the original American ideal known as Liberalism, now Classical Liberalism. In the modern era you are better off referencing Rothbard than Freedman.
Rustmilian 1 point 3 years ago path: 0 3804549 3811335, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
anarchotaoist -7 points 3 years ago
You do know Capitalism was making the slave trade unfeasable. Technology is superior at mass production. It increasingly made sense to invest in machinery etc. The most skilled slaves were eventually given free reign and only had to pay a fee to their master. White nations and their Capitalist technology ended slavery - at least in the Western world.
ZenFriedRice 28 points 3 years ago
Exactly, people must remain completely static. Don't change, its a red flag.
systemglitch -7 points 3 years ago
I have trouble imagining ever being proud of being a communist. It's right up there with all the bad things in society.
anarchotaoist -6 points 3 years ago
anarchotaoist -10 points 3 years ago
Colonialism - you mean a collectivist institution for the "social" and "communal" good (the state) - disrespecting others private property rights? nb. Private property is a principle of the Free Market. All private property rights are an extension of self ownership. To hell with slavery - which includes the collective slavery of Communism!
anarchotaoist -12 points 3 years ago
anarchotaoist -7 points 3 years ago
Today under central banks (an tenant of communism) we have government controlled inflationary currency robbing us all.
bbpolterGAYst 16 points 3 years ago
the black book of communism cites deaths of nazi soldiers on the eastern front as victims of the communist regime
pineapplelover 5 points 3 years ago
Afghanistan is communist?
Edit: The entire African continent is also communist?
Cinnamon3431 1 point 3 years ago
dont tell this guy how many people died in capitalism (capitalist wars, poverty, etc.)
possiblylinux127 -12 points 3 years ago
Uh, I have been using Linux for 7 years and I'm pretty conservative. Don't associate Linux with corrupt communist ideals
UnknownQuantity -6 points 3 years ago
Please explain communism for those who don't understand. I lived in a communist country so it's not for my benefit, but others might be curious.
raubarno 1 point 3 years ago
Okay, maybe Lithuanian will explain better to an Estonian:
Once in the 19th century there was a rapid industrialization. Farmers and citizen guild-workers lost their economical value and had to turn into factory workers. At that time, there was massive unemployment, and factory owners were unregulated. Then a philosopher Karl Marx went in, and started to analyse. He concluded that, in history, it's always 'slaves vs landowners', then 'peasants vs seniors', and ultimately 'workers vs enterprise owners (bourgeoisie)'. He named this phenomenon 'class struggle', and hypothesised that, after workers will defeat bourgeoisie, then it would be possible to create a perfect egalitarian society with no exploitation, in which people have all the rights except the right to be rich. That was called 'Communism', a proposed ideal society.
His ideas attracted many followers, which were split into several political campus, for instance, Socialist democracy ('mild' socialism, rich people pay more taxes, etc.), Anarcho-Communism (no state, no regulations, lived only for a short period of time in Ukraine), and many more.
Then V. Lenin came in, and told there must be a 'peasants' revolution' that abolishes the existing state(s), kill all the enemies of that revolution, become a Socialist country (ie. State controls all the economy) and then slowly progress into Communism. His practices were furthermore refined by Stalin and were called 'Marxism-Leninism'. History of the USSR shows that the power of a Socialist state can be used to create a totalitarian prison.
So 'Communism' can mean either an egalitarian society or heading towards that direction, basically.
UnknownQuantity 2 points 3 years ago
I appreciate your write up, but I think you replied to a different comment from some person in Estonia who might or might not have lived under that regime. Either way, Marxism-Leninism had been drilled into me for decades.
victoitor 1 point 3 years ago
There are a variety of views from different authors and political experiences. But they're mostly rooted on not having privately owned means of production (a consensus exists for big corporations at least). This would mean big corporations cannot be privately owned, it must belong to the workers themselves. This implies the destination of profits should be decided between its workers, and not its owners. This might even make many more people rich than just some random dude (like Musk) for owning the whole thing.
In general, there is no contradiction between being rich and communism. In fact, the workers should get the profits for what they build.
UnknownQuantity 1 point 3 years ago
Dude, you don't know the first thing about communism. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." It means you don't take more than you need. "Rich communist" is an oxymoron.
bear -3 points 3 years ago
You lived in a country that called itself communist, in the same way that North Koreans live in a country that calls itself democratic. There has never been a country that actually achieved communism, because communism requires there be no state. At best these countries would claim that communism was their goal, but honestly most were lying, or at the very least co-opted and turned against their ideals somewhere down the line.
chaorace 7 points 3 years ago
I do agree that the ideal communist state has never existed, though I need to challenge the assertion that communism demands the existence of no state. Anti-state philosophies are generally characterized as "anarchism" -- it's certainly true that communists and anarchists have historically held common interests, but in general they do not view themselves as members of the same group.
It's a weird distinction, but the distinction exists for a reason. Communists do not reject the establishment of a governing apparatus, so it's actually very inaccurate to say that "communism requires there to be no state". You could instead adopt the anarchist argument that "communism is self-defeating because it leads to the creation of non-communist states", but keep in mind that this is in-and-of-itself a rejection of communism in favor of communal anarchism.
UnknownQuantity 2 points 3 years ago
Fantastic! I thought that communism was impossible to achieve in a state, but if it is only achievable in 'no state', then we have to come up with a word more negative than 'impossible'.
PropaGandalf -61 points 3 years ago
Hah what? So you are running from bad corporations to daddy government? Somwhere I took another turn because this journey turned me into a libertarian.
captainlezbian 27 points 3 years ago
As an American in order to understand our libertarians you must first understand the gilded age of American capitalism. It was an era of extreme wealth disparity, zero regulations, and everything was disgusting and dangerous. Libertarians dislike everything that ended that.
ConfusedLlama 17 points 3 years ago
Well, libertarian doesn't necessarily mean someone in line with the Libertarian Party of the US. If we want to consider the meanings of these terms by referring to how they are understood to in the US, we would be all very confused, since everything in the US seems to have a twisted meaning.
See for example, their Fascist party is called the "Republican Party"... Their Right-center oriented party is often referred to as a "left-leaning" party... and finally there's another right-wing party with slightly different positions than the fascist party, calling themselves the "Libertarian Party", because why not! 🤷
PropaGandalf -1 points 3 years ago
I'm not American either so idk
irmoz 31 points 3 years ago
Why do so many people think left vs right is government vs no government? It's fucking baffling. You think leftists just love the government? Just... why?? Who told you that? Why do you believe them?
"So long as the state exists there is no freedom. When there is freedom, there will be no state."
So much love for state, here...
I'll tell you something that might shock you. I'm pretty much a communist. I also hate the state. Does that confuse you? It shouldn't!
Petter1 1 point 3 years ago
The initial answer to first comment stated that right side don’t want more laws vs left side wants more laws Then I thought, it is kinda the other way with my anarchist friends
PropaGandalf -4 points 3 years ago
I'm sorry I assumed Marxism-Leninism instead of libertarian socialism because of the predominant tankie culture here on lemmy.
Spaceinv8er -1 points 3 years ago
I never knew what a tankie was until I came to Lemmy... now I see it everywhere. It's gross...
ConfusedLlama -6 points 3 years ago
That's assuming that all workers have good intentions and consider the good of all humans before power.
Well, surprise! Workers are humans. And we have seen many times what happens when uncontrolled power has been given to any human group or individual humans.
There should be no power to the government. Only management positions. And those management positions need to be open to all people with abilities regarding those management positions.
Of course this discussion in this form is an oversimplification (e.g. no mention of whether/how to run a police force, a judiciary, or a military), but the point is that not only a "government being run by workers" wouldn't solve any problem, it would introduce even more, in my opinion. It's just as bad as effectively letting the corporations or rich people run the government. Looks at the US
irmoz 1 point 3 years ago
There should be no power to the government. Only management positions. And those management positions need to be open to all people with abilities regarding those management positions.
Yo. You just described a worker run government.
Uncle_Iroh -7 points 3 years ago
In theory it's great, but have you seen the complete fucking braindead idiots we share this world with?
imAadesh 14 points 3 years ago
In India we have a corporation named AMUL. It is collectively run by 3.6 Million farmers. It has wide variety of dairy products such as milk, yoghurt, ice cream, chocolates etc. If farmers can... Then what's wrong in believing we can.
Edit, its not 5000, it is 3.6 Million milk producers
Uncle_Iroh 1 point 3 years ago
Companies, great! Government, horrible track record...
ConfusedLlama 1 point 3 years ago
No problem with that! That's actually a great thing, in my opinion. The problem, however would be a government run by any specific group of people with any specific properties other than their abilities. Because otherwise it would inevitably lead to dictatorship, as it has been tried many times throughout the history.
In short:
corporations run by workers -> Good!
governments run specifically by workers/corporations/religious institutions/rich people/etc -> No, please no!
Everyone should be able to participate in running and managing our society.
Uncle_Iroh -2 points 3 years ago
Elon is just an ultra autist, I don't think he's stupid if you make him do some engineering stuff.
Haui 0 points 3 years ago
The problem is: intelligence doesn’t help either. Sure, it lets you grasp problems pretty fast, makes you a good learner but do you have any ideas how many psychopaths are actually gifted?
As an autistic individual, I‘d say the autistic way would be pretty awesome as a government. You have to tell the truth and are not allowed to care how anyone receives it (what could go wrong, right?). I‘m obviously joking, mostly. I‘d explore it though.
I think the current way is the worst (turning more populist every day) because the majority of people is rather unintelligent and does not have a logical concept on life (from an autistic standpoint).
rephlekt2718 0 points 3 years ago
Say more about how the majority of people don’t have a logical concept of life from an autistic standpoint, I’m curious!
Prunebutt 12 points 3 years ago
You know that Rothbard stole that term from anarcho-communists (libertarian socialists), right?
Edit: Thought you meant right-wing libertarianism. Was confused, since IMHO Marx (without Lenin/Mao/etc.) is actually quite compatible with left-wing libertarianism. Even if he had a personal feud with Bakunin.
pjhenry1216 12 points 3 years ago
Libertarian cannot work without socialism essentially. You cannot have a free market where the worker doesn't own the means of production. Power will always pool to select individuals and those who have collected power have shown no remotely reliable track record to serve humanity's best interest over their own. In fact, it's regularly shown the exact opposite. Libertarianism is just an excuse to act against the good of society for your own benefit and fuck anyone you step on along the way. I've never heard a defense of libertarianism that is actually good for society. It's basically just dressing up the belief you can't be forced to do good, so you can't get in trouble if you do bad.
ConfusedLlama 3 points 3 years ago
I think you're describing right libertarianism (which is what is known as libertarianism in the US, I think), which is influenced mainly by the ideas of Ayn Rand.
But there is also left libertarianism, which is not based on "free market" as per those libertarians. Examples of people on this spectrum I think would be Noam Chomsky (US), Bernie Sanders (US), Jeremy Corbyn (UK)... and historically: Nestor Makhno (Ukraine), National confederation of labor (Spain, fighting against Franco), Iberian Anarchist Federation (Same), and effectively any other left-leaning Anarchism-oriented person, movement or party.
pjhenry1216 3 points 3 years ago
Looking into it, I can see some issues with the idea (I don't understand how it wouldn't fall pretty to the tragedy of the commons), plus I definitely don't think Sanders would fit into there. I don't see any of his proclaimed positions fitting into any definition of left-libertarian. Plus I don't see how left-libertarian wouldn't fall prey to the same problem we have with capitalism now, despite being an anti-capitalist notion. It's strong sense of individual ownership of anything other than natural resources seems at odds with a lot of other socialist concepts. I will caveat all of this with saying I have a very limited understanding of left-libertarianism, but just reading any given definition just seems to give rise to very clear contradictions. I feel like either it is problematic or no one is really sharing good definitions of it.
captainlezbian 10 points 3 years ago
I ran from bad corporations to workplace democracy where does that place me?
PropaGandalf 0 points 3 years ago
Full democracy? If so then rather something liberal.
linux
@lemmy.ml
68060
9443
5184
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
go to feed...
linux
@lemmy.ml
68060
9443
5184
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
go to feed...
save