For context: The thread was about why people hate Hexbear and Lemmygrad instances

  • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    They are radically different but authoritarians have corrupted both to be the same brute force regime. Communism shouldn’t have any specific single leader. It should be a conference of lots of little communities that participate together to make a state work. Sadly authoritarian ideals corrupt politics and make people want to rule that should never be leaders in the first place. Those leaders install their own friends who run the government into the ground - and it’s the government model that is to blame?

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are spot on on just about everything. The only thing I take issue with is saying that both werr corrupted by authoritarians. Fascism doesn’t exist without authoritarians. It’s just a shame that in America, especially as well as plenty of other places in the west, we are miseducated if we are educated at all on the subject.

      • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think there is a model of fascism that, when a dictator is removed from the scenario, looks like a corporate autocracy. Late stage capitalism, like a corporate Cyberpunk dystopia, is what happens when power isn’t seized by a megalomaniac. Unfortunately corporations are documented to gather the psychotically inclined within its upper echelons so any and all rulings are definitely going to be corrupted. At least communism allows voting for leaders and not private decisions without review like private enterprise.

        • Eldritch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That still ends up with local dictators and oligarchs. Yes, you’re not likely to end up with one global dictator etc. but ultimately would not be all that different in the long run. It’s exactly what they want a return to. Feudalism.

    • DreamerofDays@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      If the model realized at scale repeatedly results in the same or similar effects, maybe there is something wrong with the model.

      (Be those inherent mechanical flaws, flaws of ignoring parts of human nature, flaws of a model designed to work in a vacuum, or flaws of intricate and fragile necessary rules)

    • Tedesche@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      and it’s the government model that is to blame?

      Yes, because it leaves itself so prone to authoritarian takeover. As I’ve said before, this is a feature of communism, not a bug. A single, one-party “transitional” government is intended. You might as well just put up a sign that says “Dictator Wanted.” This is why there isn’t a single instance of communism on a nation-state scale that hasn’t quickly devolved into an authoritarian state. It’s not hard to understand this. Your government model has to account for the reality that people are going to disagree on things and faction out. Your model has to be able to manage that process. Communism insists everyone adhere to the same ideology, and those that don’t just get “re-educated.” It’s a horrible ideology, a horrible government model; naïve utopian fantasy at best, cynical authoritarian scheme at worst.

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Communism scales horribly and practically begs for intolerant authoritarians to take over because the structure promotes compromise and compromising with intolerance ends up with intolerance. It works well when a small group voluntarily creates a small commune and everyone is on the same page. Everyone being able to see the overall community is pretty important for them to see how they fit in.

      Capitalism also scales terribly, but when approached as a competition that requires regulation at least it can scale better because everyone can be watchful of bad actors. It still scales poorly because large companies can gain undo influence over government, but at least that influence tends to be about business and profit and not ethnic cleansing of the ‘wrong people’ that tends to be inherent to large scale communism. Yeah, that can also happen for profit with capitalism too, but again the acknowledgement of necessary regulations can mitigate that for the most part.

      Everything tends to fall apart at a large enough scale though.

      • livus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        at least it can scale better because everyone can be watchful of bad actors.

        I think you’re talking about democracy there, not capitalism?

        If we look at a country with capitalism and not democracy (e.g UAE) I don’t think it has any protective effect on transparency.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s no difference between them. That’s the thing. Two words for the same pile of shit.

        • livus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          .ml = Mali.

          I know it was the haunt of scammers when it was a free domain, but the government of Mali have reassigned management now so hopefully it will be less problematic as time goes on.

            • livus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              @moosetwin I know that’s the rumour but I suspect they were picking out of a very small pool of free domains and the free part had a lot more to do with it.

              Saying the Mali suffix “means” Marxist Leninism is a bit like saying your .com stands for Capitalism Only Mate. I mean sure it does but only in your own mind, not irl.