• Decompose@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Uncorrupt government”

    This is as delusional as anyone can get.

    A wise man said it all once: “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh so pragmatism would have that we abandon any hope at equality and we should accept to be slaves for the rich?

      • Decompose@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t get why the only solution is to trust others to take care of you. I have some bad news: No one gives a crap about you. The sooner you realize this the better. You should be responsible and learn more on how to manage your assets, investments, money, etc. In my opinion, this idea that we have to keep trusting the elite to run our lives is ridiculous. People should be more responsible and manage their money in an independent way.

        I like cryptocurrency for this, because I have full control on my money and no government will be able to rehypothecate my money for whatever risky nonsense they’re doing. But you don’t have to be like me or like cryptocurrency. All you have to do is start thinking of a solution that works for you. You can start saving now, diversify in the world economy, and take risks that are appropriate to you, and prepare for your retirement. No need to act as if you have zero power when there are enough tools to give you power over your own money.

        I’m the kind of guy that takes all my matters into my own hands, because I trust no one. I even run my email server, my cloud, my VPNs, my everything. I don’t need anyone, company or government, and I have calculated risks in all my endeavour. I can migrate whenever I want. I believe everyone in the world should strive towards that. But we’re living in a centralized world where google alone can just block almost everyone’s life. I’m not in that club.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”

          ~Carl Sagan

          You will always have people taking care of you, from the clothes you wear to the things you eat. There is no escape.

          Not even by living on your own are you not using other peoples knowledge or products.

        • regalia@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t get why the only solution is to trust others to take care of you.

          Society is built around people “taking care” of you in different ways. Like being a doctor, a teacher, an employer, the police, etc.

          That’s why we grew out of being caveman, because we’re built to be cooperative with each other in our DNA. If we didn’t, we’d either be small tribes or individuals and probably die out really fast. It’s because we need others to rely on or we’d literally be extinct.

          • Decompose@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t think you understand what trust means. There’s almost zero trust with doctors, teachers, etc. You don’t trust doctors out of the blue, but you build an informed decision from the reviews of such a doctor by seeing if they’re good at what they do. This hunky dory delusion that everyone trusts everyone is not real. The doctor, teacher, etc, will be punished if they misbehave and that’s what the free market is about. Keeping them in line as a kind of incentive to behave well.

            On the other hand, what you guys want to do is hand all your wealth and power to elites that don’t give two craps about you, have zero consequences in the case they mess up, and have zero incentive to do the right thing (as opposed to make it look like they’re doing the right thing), and then expect them to not steal your hard earned money, and then cry about it when they do it. Well, guess what? I don’t trust the fed has my best interest when they printed 80% of the US dollar money supply over the last 3 years. Why should I store my wealth in USD? Now you go ahead and trust them and do that, and keep complaining on lemmy that the rich are getting richer (NOT because of the printing) when someone tries to talk sense into you. I guess everyone will pay for their decisions after all.

            • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Doctors are doctors because they passed their doctorate.

              Someone more knowledgeable than you set the minimum bar of skill they require to practice their craft.

              You don’t get to make trust based decisions on doctors because you don’t know what a good doctor looks like. You lack the knowledge to do so. Unless you are yourself a doctor.

              I have even less trust in corporations than the government.

              If you let those, they would bring slavery back if they could. Since that improves their bottom line.

              • Decompose@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Dude everything you said is wrong… doctors don’t have doctorates… PhDs do. Also you didn’t invalidate my point, which is that trust isn’t blind. You sound like a teenager. When you grow up you’ll understand what accountability means and how governments have none.

                • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  So not only do you have no idea what you are talking about, you also fall back to ad hominem fallacies because you are unable to debunk the stuff I said.

                  Your knowledge is lacking, so your opinion on who you can trust is worthless.

                  You sound like a science-denying anti-vaxxer.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      That is why we throw them out every couple of years and choose someone different.

      I do the same with my underpants.

      • Decompose@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right… you do understand that most politicians in western countries are career politicians that have been there for decades, right?

        A good example is Biden himself. He’s been there in politics for like 50 years. It’s a geriatric club at this point it’s become a common joke.

        Same delusion as the poster of the meme. People believe in the same ideals that created the problem without looking at what it has become. Not everything that sounds good is good. Life is more complex than the simple model that simple people keep believing in. People will always find a way to abuse a system for their own benefit. That’s the result of “power corrupts”.

    • PerCarita@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve seen this sentiment being repeated in the replies, yet this also applies to private companies that are run by absolutely powerful people. It’s true that Lord Acton wrote this about the monarchy, but some execs in multinational corporations today are just as powerful as old-timey monarchs.

      • Decompose@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t disagree with you. My contention is that the assumption of “uncorrupt power” is just naive and short term, at best.

      • HerbalGamer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        oh it’s a real thing, it’s the fascist base

        Please explain what exactly you mean by that?

        Are they not simply misinformed comrades-to-be?

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maoist Third Worldists make a strong case for bourgeoisification.

          I think that’s changing as the American empire declines, but for a long time the “middle class” directly benefitted from the superexploitation of the 3rd world. It’s how their middle incomes could afford so much.

          • HerbalGamer@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s how their middle incomes could afford so much.

            Only because it’s widely thought that their incomes had to come from exploiting those beneath them, instead of taking it back from those above.

            You’re being exploited by someone who tells you that’s what it takes and you just have to look below for someone less fortunate than yourself and exploit them. Instead we should come together with those less fortunate and collectively turn our attention to those who have been exploiting all of us to take it back instead of fighting the puppet on the other hand.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Their own lives were comfortable and easy in the middle class. Risking it all for revolution to help other people is not in their class interests.

              The middle manager is still being exploited by the CEO, sure, but lets not pretend like the middle manager is a potential revolutionary. How much better could their life actually get? They have a home, vacation, healthcare, education, leisure time, and all the toys they can buy.

              But! Like I said, as the American empire declines that changes drastically. Without cheap 3rd world labor to superexploit and with the decline of their own middle incomes, they’ll quickly find their comfortable and easy lives disappearing. Suddenly the middle manager isn’t so different from the rest of us down in the dirt, and the CEO will still be raking in millions and billions off of their labor.

              Once bourgeoisification is reversed, the middle class ceases to exist.

  • DrownedAxolotl@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep in mind, you are posting this to lemmy.ml, so I don’t know what you expected… Maybe something like this would be better recieved on lemmy.world or on your account’s instance.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hexbear also has a large number of Putin and CCP apologists. Authoritarian bootlicking isn’t liberalism.

      • AcidMarxist [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        All governments are authoritiarian. They have the authority to tax you and can do that cuz they have a monopoly on violence. But if you have “HUMAN RIGHTS” written on a piece of paper in your capital building that basically makes you a democracy, right?

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          All governments are authoritiarian.

          This argument is essentially “words have no real meaning”. Having authority does not make a government authoritarian. The term authoritarianism is defined. The CCP is authoritarian, by definition, starting with (but not ending with) having only one political party.

          • Flinch [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The CCP is authoritarian, by definition, starting with (but not ending with) having only one political party.

            China has 8 other political parties in its congress xi-lib-tears

            also it’s officially the CPC (Communist Party of China), not the CCP stalin-approval

            • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Mmmhmm, and how many of those tiny parties have any functional political power? When was the last time that a non-CCP member led the PRC?

              Oh right, never. These other parties are tokens. Period.

              • robinn2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The parties represent interests separate from and under the CPC, which is one of the largest political parties on earth and comprises of a tenth of the eligible population in China. The CPC is the party which represents the majority interests of the population, of which mas multiparty organization would merely atomize and undermine socialization.

                Also stop saying ‘CCP’; you are illiterate lmao.

                • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  you are illiterate lmao.

                  Since this is demonstrably not the case, I have to assume that you don’t know what the word means, which is somewhat ironic…

              • AcidMarxist [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                America. This is America. It’s the same picture. America does the same thing but in a different fashion. Please at least admit America is authoritiarian. Why not? I’m a principled maoist, but this makes me want to burn down Walmarts anarxi

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Pushing Native Americans onto reservations lifted a lot of European immigrants out of poverty.

          Burning fossil fuels lifted entire nations out of poverty.

          Campaigns against the barbarians lifted many Romans out of poverty.

          If you think this “lift” is some example of public good in action that hasn’t come at the cost of exploitation, you’re delusional.

          • Krause [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            China lifted 800 million people out of poverty by building healthcare, transport, housing, jobs, education and food security? Heh, but what about that time European settlers got richer by genociding Native Americans? Technically that was “poverty reduction” too, commie smuglord

          • RedDawn [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Chinese poverty elimination didn’t come on the backs of any of those things you goober. “Well have you considered that sometimes OTHER countries did bad things to reduce domestic poverty, and therefore China doing so is inherently bad actually !?” Grow the fuck up, this isn’t a real argument.

    • Kidplayer_666@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Liberal? They’re as extreme as conservatives who call communism everything they don’t like (cause they call everything they don’t like “fascist”)

      • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe the comrade is making a joke about our politics. Not everything we don’t like is fascism, some of it is liberalism. But of course, we all know what bleeds when a liberal gets scratched.

          • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            What exactly are you seeing as pro-russia?

            As communists we’re staunchly anti-NATO and against the US imperialist order. There’s a degree of critical support for the Russian Federations struggle against NATO, but thats not really pro-russia, or at least how we would define being pro-russia.

            Similarly we have critical support for Iran in its struggle against the US led imperial order, and we support when they do things like engaging in trade with AES like Venezuela. Thats not the same as direct support for the theocracy there or all their domestic policies for example

              • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                How does communism inform your perspective?

                NATO aid and their not allowing Ukraine to negotiate peace is what is prolonging this war. We aren’t arguing for all of Ukraine to become Russian territory, which hasn’t been the position of the Russian Federation either.

                We would like a negotiated peace that alllows the Donbas republics to leave Ukraine and join the Russian Federation as they’ve voted to do, and a promise for Ukraine to not become part of NATO. That senario is not the alternative you’re talking about, or what you’re implying we support.

              • PorkrollPosadist [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Without NATO aid, Ukraine will just plainly be taken over by Purine Russia.

                The war would end, a whole lot of people would stop getting killed, and it would open a sliver of space to organize on class lines instead of nationalist ones.

                As it is, it is basically illegal to be a communist or an anarchist in Ukraine, and the country is under martial law with NATO-armed and trained fascist brigades doling out summary justice. Could it get worse? Why should the left advocate for people to die on the hill of a country which arrests communists, dismantles labor unions, and liquidates public infrastructure on internet auctions for foreign investors?

                If you take the most vulgar Anarchist approach, all states are bad, full stop. Political practice doesn’t even operate on that paradigm. You struggle to undermine oppressive hierarchical systems that you come in direct contact with through direct action. If you take the vulgar Leninist approach, the Proletariat should struggle for the overthrow of their Bourgeoisie (this would include the proletariat of Ukraine and Russia respectively, as well as the proletariat of Western countries which see this conflict only as a means to strengthen their military alliances and diplomatic positions). Of course, the situation is too nuanced to apply such a vulgar approach, but that should be the STARTING POINT for anybody who considers themselves anti-capitalists. You should be able to justify any deviation from those bedrock positions.

              • ComradeCmdrPiggy [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                What if I told you that in March 2022 the Ukrainians and Russians came this close to closing a deal that would end the war… that is, before the Ukrainians decided to accept effectively unlimited NATO aid in exchange for scrapping said deal?

                • SeaJ@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Ukraine offered neutrality which was what Russia wanted and Russia rejected it. Then Ukraine accepted aid.

  • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know a lot of you are meming, but the amount of dogshit takes here is almost depressing.

    There is no single answer to what a good government looks like, there is no “best one” and surely any single one that is based purely on ideals or idealized human behavior will fail, no matter how hard you believe in it.

    One of the arguably most successful governments is the Chinese one and they are and were neither just, nor friendly, nor purely capitalist, communist or authoritarian. They are very China first and fuck everyone else and that works because of a lack of conscience and them adapting to everything without a second thought. Looking away and screwing people over as needed. You can be capitalist as long as it works for them. You can do whatever if it benefits them.

    The US does this too, in different ways with similar effects.

  • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The amount of left wing folks on some of the more extreme instances bashing the most left wing people in the American Democratic party because they’re not complete socialist idiologes is just wild. Like I want to see a major shift towards some form of democratic socialism in America and think we definitely need real change in that direction, but the hatred for elected officials closest to your views just because they aren’t extreme enough for you is silly.

    I don’t understand why they feel the need to attack the left win branch of the DNC when Joe Manchin equists. When the Republican party exists. Focus efforts on some positive change and getting people you want in office instead of trying to tear down what should be an ally. Make the people you think aren’t extreme left enough the conservatives of a new wave. The defeatest attitude that just criticizes the closest thing they have to what they want is just silly.

    Other than a violent change of the guard/revolution. It’s not going to be an instant process. You have to accept small progress where you can get it.

  • Beanconscript@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Markets are inherently problematic and lead to wealth being centralized in the hands of the few owners. A well regulated market ignores the problem which must be addressed; the dichotomy of workers and owners. Class struggle won’t be fixed if not addressed. Neo-liberalism markets can’t be fixed with more neo-liberalism.

    • Vingst [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Even if everything was worker-owned, markets present problems. Through luck and circumstance, some buyers and sellers will have an easier time to the detriment of others. Some will be priced out. Wealth and power will concentrate. With that comes regulatory capture. There goes the idealist “uncorrupt government.”

      Anti-social strategies like loss leaders pricing out competitors and price gouging and collusion don’t go away with worker ownership.

      It’s still a system of self-interested parties. Social Darwinism over collective well-being.

      … not only vertical relations of capitalist exploitation based around the wage labor–capital relation — capitalists exploiting their workers — but also horizontal relations of exploitation — wealthier firms exploiting poorer firms. Horizontal exploitation can occur even between worker-owned cooperatives, which leads you to argue that market socialism may be exploitative in much the same way capitalism is.

      https://jacobin.com/2023/02/nicholas-vrousalis-exploitation-as-domination-interview-capitalism-labor-justice

  • Barometer3689@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I thought left also meant protection against unregulated markets? Without regulations it is just going to be capitalismplusplus.

  • Filipdaflippa@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Got bombarded with hate when I said a solution to Nazis isnt to kill Nazis lol the left are just as unhinged as the right. Most Americans are mentally ill because they can’t afford to see a therapist.

    • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well we’d hope the solution for Nazis is we only threaten to kill them first, before they get powerful enough to start organizing. And if they surrender and submit peacefully to re-education, maybe that’s ok in some rare instances

      If they’re already organized I suggest cluster munitions or have them lined up against a nice brick wall

            • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re talking about the Nazis which were the people that perpetrated the holocaust. We think it was good to use violence, you seem to think otherwise. What did you think should’ve been done to stop the holocaust?

                • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You’re talking about the Nazis. Your post was about nazis, people are responding talking about nazis. The discussion is clearly about nazis, which comes as a result of you framing the discussion about nazis. If you didn’t want it to be about nazis, but I stead your perception that leftists label political opponents “nazi” as a way to otherize them and justify political violence, then you should’ve argued that point instead.
                  Do better, learn what words mean.

                  And answer the question

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve never heard a right winger call for more regulation. They always blame their failures on too much regulation.

        • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Right wing in this case meaning the actual terminology (capitalist), not the American terminology of right vs left-wing being a question of social issues

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right wing vs left wing has always been relative to the status quo. Capitalism was left wing when feudalism was the norm. And now Regulated Capitalism is left wing compared the norm of Unregulated Capitalism.

            The people who are bothered by OP are making imperfect the enemy of good. What they’re proposing is still progress.

              • Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                And you wont get enough allies to get anything done. This is what Divide and Conquer looks like. It’s only a half measure if you stop at the first accomplish. Let the populist get a taste of a social safety net again and they’ll want to push for more the next time.