EDIT: no, I don’t sympathize with nazis (neither I sympathize with those who call everyone nazi when they’re losing an argument ;)

  • AlpineSteakHouse [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    You said you supported Social Democracy not Democratic Socialism. Dem Socs are well-meaning but idealistic, not optimistic but the political philosophy of idealism. Soc Dems are supporters of a kinder capitalism for the Imperial core but keeping the child slaves mining cobalt in the Congo.

    The fact that you think these are the same proves the original posters point that you should read theory. They were harsh but you were implying that keeping exploitation of the third world is preferable to socialism.

    Dude you still don’t stop worker exploitation, don’t solve the contradiction of working and capitalist classes, don’t end imperialism or colonialism (social democracy outsources exploitation to the third world)

    Ok let me know how your method works out

    • mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You said you supported Social Democracy not Democratic Socialism.

      What a terrible mistake to make! Perhaps you should have assumed it was the correct orientation of the two words that are spelled exactly the same.

      The fact that you think these are the same proves the original posters point that you should read theory.

      I have, but thanks for the suggestion.

      • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Assuming people are using words in the way they are widely and commonly accepted to mean (I mean, just look at Wikipedia for an easy starting point) is not a bad thing?

          • Alaskaball [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m innudated with endless notifications from you dweebs, mistakes happen.

            People keep telling me that I shit my pants based off the way I smell and the growing brown stain on my pants but they’re all tankies because they’re all wrong

        • can@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe we can assume people got terminology wrong and not immediately jump to death wishes?

      • uralsolo [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        two words that are spelled exactly the same

        Social and Socialism are not spelled the same, neither are Democracy and Democratic.

        • mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          What incredible insight. The word ‘social’ is referring to ‘socialism’ and so is the relation between ‘democracy’ and ‘democratic’.

          It would take an idiot to mix these up, right?

          • AlpineSteakHouse [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            The word ‘social’ is referring to ‘socialism’ and so is the relation between ‘democracy’ and ‘democratic’.

            I guess social security = socialism security in your world? Social welfare programs are not socialism and if your political education included anything beyond Elizabeth Warren’s policy page you’d know that.

            • mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, social policies are not socialism, however, they do generally benefit the working class.

              You guys are so worried about centrists that you are ignoring the fact that the US had a far right coup attempt less than three years ago.

                • mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No it has not been far right since 1776. I guess when you make up facts it’s easy to prove your point though.

                  By the way, when’s the glorious peoples revolution supposed to begin? More importantly, where are the people???

                  • Read Liberalism A Counter History or shut up about shit you don’t understand.

                    The people already revolted in the worlds largest country and their success will convince people to make similar steps once it’s made obvious you’re being fucked by your far right regimes. The people are hungering in most of the world and they will stand up you brain wormed fucker

      • AlpineSteakHouse [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        What a terrible mistake to make! Perhaps you should have assumed it was the correct orientation of the two words that are spelled exactly the same.

        Your beef is with the English Language not me. How is it my fault that you misidentified yourself? Funnily enough, you still don’t identify your actual political position. It’s clear that the only political position you’d take is what gives you an advantage in the argument. Fucking debatebros lol.

        I have, but thanks for the suggestion.

        Reading so much theory that you confuse two different political ideologies. Sometimes I read so much theory that that I claim to be a monarchist when I really mean to say I’m an anti-monarchist. Obviously the other person should have understood what I meant. Your literally on a communication medium that allows you to plan and edit your comments. You have no excuse for making this grade school mistake.

        • mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Debatebro? That’s what Hexbear does best.

          I would actually love to engage in good faith discussions, but Hexbear users only operate in bad faith, particularly by sealioning. Like clockwork, you don’t engage in ideas but rather give reading assignments.

          I’ve read Das Kapital and agree with virtually all the premises about how society is unfair to those who actually generate the surplus value and think that we need to fix a system that breaks cyclically, as Karl Marx correctly predicted in volume I. The only solutions I’ve seen presented are a total revolution a la 1917, which occured before globalization. Anything close to this in the current globalized world will kill at minimum hundreds of millions globally due to interdependence on products that Marx would consider “needs”, such as medications and medical equipment like dialysis machines.

          The difference between you and me is that I’d rather work to reestablish democracy away from capital interests. I don’t want a dictatorship, I want a functional democracy. Propaganda is often used to disillusion the working class from democracy, and if you don’t vote in elections then you are clearly part of the problem.

          Edit: Lmao. Citing"theory" gets crickets from the people who endlessly say “you just haven’t read theory”. It’s like they don’t know what to do with someone who reads to understand, rather than “reading” just to virtue signal.

          • DPRK_Chopra [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is a childish understanding of the theory you purport to have studied. What’s your concrete proposal to “reestablish democracy away from capital interests” that has actually worked?

            I don’t want a dictatorship

            We do. It’s called a dictatorship of the proletariat and it’s actually worked.

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

                Cuba, China, USSR all saw massive gains in just about every measurable metric post revolution because they adhere to the theory that says you have to work to actively suppress the worst urges of the ownership class, aka the people who destroyed the biosphere and possibly life on earth for short term gains. The liberal rely your probably already wanting to type is to whinge about how these systems still had their flaws, arent perfect utopias, are authoritarian (yes, against capital) etc, but at least they get results and aren’t idealism, but actual application of a rigorous program.