I like how the reactionary communities post shit that isn’t thought out. Then you got a couple of… Left communities where they post thought out essays. Too long to read but probably mostly true

I for one think we should continue with the way things are. Obviously the people who own companies like Tesla and Amazon are better than us. We should be happy to have a job tbh. Seriously, why would I want to be burdened with decisions like whether or not I get healthcare, or whether or not food and education is accessible. We are better off letting the market decide. If education was so important, wouldn’t the market find a way to make money off of it?

In terms of ROI this is genius

Good parents teaching their kids what happens when you tell the truth to authority.

Buddy here doesn’t understand that you can support democracy for the workers without simping for some socialist project. Nor can he comprehend that criticism of political economies leads to a better understanding of things .

The liberal mindset of us vs them, as if there are two teams. Though to be fair this is partially true. It is us, the workers of the world, versus them, those who own and control the world. Solidarity among us who must work to survive is the only way to liberate ourselves from those who seek only power and profit.

Criticise every project, and your own beliefs. Learn from the mistakes you and others have made. And act with compassion.

Or regurgitate western propaganda what do I know.

Absolutely right! I cannot believe that the US government tried a colour revolution against the Chinese people. We can’t tolerate a foreign people defending themselves against aggressors, but we can tolerate aggression as long as it comes from the west? Hypocrisy

Yes, we should let the unbiased and just judicial system remove any potential check on it’s power through the exclusion of a jury. Surely then things will be better. In fact I can’t think of a single situation where allowing a judge and some lawyers to interpret the nuances of law led to anything terrible.

Nope, it’s the stupid idiots who don’t know anything about… What ever I want to make up right now

This thread is lit. I’m going to list 4 arrangements of the economy. If you are interested in participating, name what you think each one is:

1: A small group of people own the lands that are worked by another group of people. The leader of these owners is chosen via divine right. The people who work the land keep what they make, however for protection they must work other lands and do not keep what is made from them

2. A small group of people hold dominion of a large group of people. The large group must work for food, lodging, etc. and are forced to do so by the threat of death and physical punishment. They do not get to keep what they make, the economic situation is determined by the generosity of those who hole dominion over them

3. A small group of people own the majority of wealth in the form of businesses, factories, goods, etc. They purchase the time of a much larger group of people who sell their labour to make ends meet. The small group decides what to do with the excess goods, services, and money.

4. A large group of people own the businesses, factories, goods, etc. These people work to make ends meet and decide collectively (democratically or through other means) what to do with the excess goods services, money, etc.

I hope these are both clear and vague enough. Good luck!

If you believe one is wealthier because they deserve it, through success, hardwork, etc , then shouldn’t these apparent shining examples of success also be held to a higher standard?

Or should we somehow decide the economic cost of someone doing something illegal, then charge everyone that? For example: the risk of speeding increases quadratically (E =1/2mV^2), the higher the speed. I.e the risk of death. Do we then set a speed limit, anything above which is considered illegal. Above this level, a fine or charge is incurred based on the likelihood of a crash killing someone upto and including the cost of one’s life.

But then it’s legal to kill someone if you are wealthy enough, and the poor are inherently the most moral group.

Or we could flat fine it; which disproportionately punishes the poor. Which is like saying “ohh you are poor and that’s your fault, just like speeding. Get fucked lol”.

I’m sure that there are other options but it’s a good idea to consider the potential ramifications of fees, fines, and other punishment structures, and how they influence the society we live in.

I don’t know why this is surprising. Capitalism is an economic system where the goal is profit. So, why would capital do anything other than seek profit? Nearly all technological advances have occurred through government or institutional investments, then capital flocks to it when someone finds a way to profit from it.

Thinking block chain is a solution to anything is naive. It does nothing to change the underlying system, or the incentives that drive our economy. Like any system, the interconnections between the things that make up the system, and the goal of the system must change otherwise everything will just settle back to the status quo.

For example: media streaming is becoming cable tv again. Nothing fundamentally changed about the system of delivering media, or the goal of the system which is to drive profit. Thus, we are moving quickly back to the same model of paying for media (renting it really) and watching ads to increase the revenue of the provider

That’s true in some cases, like being anti-microsoft doesn’t mean I love Linux. But when you are against an ideology that opposes the othering of groups of people to the point of mass suffering and murder that’s different.

Choosing not to support a fight against Fascism is inherently in support of Fascism. The ideology uses manipulation and violence to oppress people, the end goal being a hyper capitalistic ethno state. So opposing the force which seeks to overcome fascism makes it easier for fascism to prevail.