There’s some weird witch hunt going on against Dessalines on there. I don’t agree with him on everything, but them trying to hound him out for being a communist, whilst using software he made because he’s a communist is kinda funny.

Not exactly. This started yesterday, when a user accused mods on .ml of, “tankie censorship,” (meaning censorship by tankies, not of tankies). He also came with some pretty good receipts that appear to show .ml mods removing criticism of China that, whether you agree with it or not, didn’t seem to violate any rules, and was well within the bounds of what most people would consider civil discourse. He also claims to have received bans from all of the .ml communities he’d ever participated in for pointing this bias out. It’s possible he’s presenting all of this with his own slant, but what he showed seems legit, and I’m not sure he could have provided more evidence without encouraging brigading.

This is now starting to snowball, with users starting to call for defederating from .ml. One .world user also posted on .cafe about Dessalines previous tankie comments, while another user has posted about finding replacements for the largest .ml communities.

So, saying what’s happing on .world is anti-communist isn’t accurate, as most the criticism has been anti-tankie. However, .world has a much higher level of liberals than most of Lemmy (they created a little echo chamber for themselves on Political Memes), and most of them are incapable or unwilling to understand the difference between a tankies and communists (or tankies and leftists…or tankies and criticism of Biden…). So, it will probably only be a matter of time before this group tries to blur the line between valid criticism of baised moderation from authoritarian apologists to general criticism of leftists.

So, tl;dr: .world isn’t broadly anti-communist, but a large portion of the community is upset about what appears to be biased moderation from tankie .ml mods, and there is a small contingent of .world liberals who I’m sure will take this opportunity to bash anyone to their left.

.world is basically Reddit 2, but filled with the most radical liberals that specifically want to not be exposed to leftist instances, even db0 has a tenuous relation with them.

.world is constantly on anticommunist witch hunts, and now that Lemmygrad and Hexbear are not visible to them thanks to defederation, .ml is the last large Marxist-aligned instance they can see, so it’s the new boogeyman.

One of them tried to tell me Lemmy is Capitalist because posting is value, lmao

Are they very much against commies?

We’re not, OP is just butthurt about Their Guy™ getting publicly dunked on for tankie branded censorship

Marx believed this unresolved phenomena would lead to violent revolution, Lenin only added his analysis of Capitalism’s evolution into Imperialism, and his theory of Revolution, which focuses on the idea of the most radical workers forming a vanguard to bring the other workers up and help direct them. Marx believed the Revolution would happen and from it Socialism would emerge, hence him advocating for “siezing the Means of Production.” He also pointed directly to the Paris Commune, a hostile takeover of government aparatus, as the Dictatorship of the Proletarait he advocated for in action.

Lenin wasn’t just “hey, let’s ignore Marx and do this at gunpoint,” it was more “hey, let’s listen to Marx, and do this at gunpoint.” Lenin actually addresses this utter de-fanging of Marx in bourgeois society in the opening section of The State and Revolution:

“What is now happening to Marx’s theory has, in the course of history, happened repeatedly to the theories of revolutionary thinkers and leaders of oppressed classes fighting for emancipation. During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes constantly hounded them, received their theories with the most savage malice, the most furious hatred and the most unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander. After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons, to canonize them, so to say, and to hallow their names to a certain extent for the “consolation” of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping the latter, while at the same time robbing the revolutionary theory of its substance, blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it. Today, the bourgeoisie and the opportunists within the labor movement concur in this doctoring of Marxism. They omit, obscure, or distort the revolutionary side of this theory, its revolutionary soul. They push to the foreground and extol what is or seems acceptable to the bourgeoisie. All the social-chauvinists are now “Marxists” (don’t laugh!). And more and more frequently German bourgeois scholars, only yesterday specialists in the annihilation of Marxism, are speaking of the “national-German” Marx, who, they claim, educated the labor unions which are so splendidly organized for the purpose of waging a predatory war!”

As for the USSR, it wasn’t totalitarian. Workers did have control, there were no real bourgeois elements, no competing markets, and the state was not an “other” compared to the Workers. They had democratic measures in the form of Soviets, and the consequences of this were free education, healthcare, high home ownership rates, and so forth. Was the USSR perfect? Absolutely not, but it was history’s first major attempt at Marxist Socialism, and we can study it for that. The revolution wasn’t “hijacked,” it was led by the Workers and continued to be until corruption took hold over time and the USSR collapsed, being hacked up and sold for parts as a part of “Shock Doctrine,” plumetting life expectancy, GDP, and causing 2 million excess deaths.

Co-operatives are met with hostile action because it’s easy to crush them when you have the state and monopoly on your side, hence why they will never likely be a leading force for Socialism within Capitalism, even if they should still be supported by Socialists everywhere.

Negative!

Text is unreadable though

beep beep boop

FTFY

Its in quotations

Continuing as usual is defeat. The more votes for 3rd party the more broken the system will look, with this a campaign for real change could take place. Instead you want to bury your head in the sand.

According to Marx communism is a scenario of complete freedom.

It’s the socialist state that is authoritarian.

I think Marx’s idea is to actively burn away the old and then the new grow spontaneously. I think he’s wrong, since the old is a result of spontaneous growth already, but that’s the theory at least.

Authoritarianism is an empty label since it’s used against one’s opposing ideologies. Rarely if ever is the inherent authoritarianism of the current or any system of government acknowledged.

Communism can be flawed and a flaw it is, but let’s not forget that capitalism imposing indignity is capitalism working perfectly and is not a flaw. We reward greed.

So with this communism if used correctly can lead to prosperity.

I would like to point you towards reading about the transitional period, its an important part of communism and also reading about internationalism, essentially its very hard to move from a greedy society to communism and equally its hard to be a communist country while surrounded by greedy countries.

“Communism” is always going to be authoritarian if by “communism” you mean a government that attempts to control the whole of society. If by “communism” you mean a society where private property (not personal property) is democratically managed, that has nothing to do with authoritarism. Nor with the Soviet Union, or China, for that matter.

So you’re a communist that denounces every communist project atop an ivory tower, instead of understanding the realities of actually building a socialist society (no magical button that will make us overcome hierarchies overnight, I’m afraid). Sounds like you’re just larping about being a communist

As I’ve been putting it: software is made of labor.

Unfortunately the actual reason Agile got big is that the cult of MBAs saw daily meetings putting scores on estimates and absolutely creamed their slacks.

deleted by creator

Microsoft can’t stop you from building software… yet.

According to a company trying to sell its Agile replacement.

What a shit measure. A key idea is to fail fast and fail often, as this leads to faster growth through more frequent (re)assessment.

SW companies only care about profit. If failure rate is 268% higher but profit is simultaneously 10% higher, then Agile is the better choice.

It’s much better to deliver useless projects afterall.

The goddamn article you yourself posted as the proof mentions how it’s an ad right at the top

Even though the research commissioned by consultancy Engprax could be seen as a thinly veiled plug for Impact Engineering methodology, it feeds into the suspicion that the Agile Manifesto might not be all it’s cracked up to be

What is impact engineering though? If it’s it’s just agile while being cognisant of technical debt over MVPs, I don’t know if it’s necessarily that different.

It seems the study was designed to sell a book and I can’t find anything about what that book says. I should probably read it but the bait way it’s being sold makes me resistant to paying to find out.

French typing rules

No it’s Satan

a basic floor to ensure no one lives in inhuman conditions

I am not an expert on political or economic theory, but I think the reason we don’t have consensus on the above is a philosophical issue. A confounding factor is that some people often confuse their greed-induced cognitive distortions as well-reasoned justification for whatever they do. But besides all that, it seems countries with market socialism are faring quite well till now, and I think are probably a good model for other economies.

Anarchism isn’t zero organization. It’s organization for legitimate and accountable purposes.

Decentralization doesn’t necessarily mean disorganization. You can create a Lemmy instance with no moderation and rely purely on the community itself to self moderate, much like someone can create an instance with rules, and if someone disagrees with the rules they can create their own. Both are part of a decentralized system, so no one is actually coerced into participating in any system by regulation, just social pressure.

Think about a roundabout though in comparison, no lights or specific order, and there is a learning curve, but overall they reduce traffic better then stoplights under many conditions.

I guess my point is sort of extrapolating that a structure/presentation also heavily influences how users perceive or use a product/idea

I find it a bit ironic that cars and traffic lights are being used as a metaphor for why anarchy won’t work. Let’s put aside that the example is of poor collective planning to build urban environments. Go to Vietnam and see how people drive without traffic lights, it’s complete madness. But it works, and in some ways it works better than what we have because the accidents are fewer and less severe while also serving more diverse modes of traffic.

The same is true when attempting to merge in the US. See Japan traffic as a counter argument.

Can’t tell if this is a joke of some kind