cross-posted from: https://piefed.zip/c/leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com/p/1650861/pluralism-go-brrr
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
Then the end stage of communism, is communism.
What Stalin did, is the end of communism. What followed was the decline and lack of innovation.
Yes, that's why anarchism.
Thats just even more fucked up libertarianism.
i think you mistake anarchism with anarcho-capitalism
Niche ideologies are like jokes: if you have to explain it it's not funny anymore
My regards to you and all of your arachnid friends
No, anarchism is a libertarian/liberal type of philosophy. Obviously not the same.
Ah I see, you are American. Sorry for your circumstances.
Nope. Just blessed with the ability to summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion.
If by " summarize ideologies in a succinct fashion" you mean "be completely wrong and lack any understanding of the ideology" the sure.
The shorthand of "libertarianism, but even more ludicrous" sums it up well.
Cool, so you're just ignorant and proudly so. Gotcha.
Oh, do enlighten me what part of the statement is untrue and start from there. Instead of going to name calling.
Anarchism is absolutely part of libertarianism, so that is check one.
Ludicrous, because of it's inherent opposition to structure undermines the idea of a coherent framework of ideals in a society.
https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html
https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionF.html
Keep on showcasing how ignorant you are. Go read a book, child.
I've read plenty of them, but please. Bring your own interpretation instead of being a little condescending brat.
Mhm, sure you have, bubba.
Indeed I have, but please keep embarrassing yourself by not even countering and just going to name calling.
I suggest reading "Debt" by David Graeber to get a better understanding of the economic effect in social structures. There are plenty of examples of historical societies that have attempted and failed at anarchy. Most of them fail when the people that do the work society needs, get used by those that do not work, eventually leading to violence. That violence goes in opposition of the social agreement, although not necessarily, as there is nothing inherent about anarchism that would hinder violence.
David Graeber was an anarchist, it is in the second line of his Wikipedia. Also he talks about it in bullshit jobs a bit.
You really are doing yourself no favors here, go read some books.
I have read Debt, as well as Dawn of Everything plus Bullshit Jobs, also by the late prominent anarchist political activist and cultural anthropologist, David Graeber. The irony that you didn't understand that those books are in support of Anarchism. You clearly didn't understand anything about what you read.
Keep embarrassing yourself. You're doing great at it.
From that book I understood that anarchism is not going to work. From the words of an anarchist.
Then you understood nothing.
Or we have different perspectives.
Pack it up, friends. Teslasaur has defeated hundreds of years of anarchist political theory, it's all over for us.
no it wasn't, at least according to marx, who they claimed to follow
the stage BEFORE communism was the dictatorship of the proletariat, which they decided was extended, and they were representing the will of the people
so it actually never got to communism
But it did... and that's the joke.
There is no "end stage" communism or capitalism that fits their own purity tests; they are both ideals that we haven't managed to accomplish as a society, ever.
So, as far as humanity is concerned, what results in the attempt to reach that ideal is communism/capitalism as we know it (not as we imagine it will be at some point in future).
All forms of larger scale attempts at communism ends with dictatorship. There is no other practical way to enforce the "correct way" of existing within the human species. Correct according to who? Religion is pretty similar to communism in that way. There is either a God/king that expresses what you are allowed to do, or a written text that is followed at the moral guideline.
Aside from the deliberate efforts by the west to destabilize any socialist or communist movements, staged coups to overthrow democratically elected leaders, and rampant pro capitalist/anti communist propaganda, a much better large scale similarity would be to the wildly successful open source movement where the product/service is free to use (moneyless), contribute to (classless), and owned in commons (by and for the proletariat).
There is no need to smear communistic movements. They manage so well on their own.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward
https://www.levandehistoria.se/english/learn-and-teach/crimes-against-humanity-under-communist-regimes-research-review
I do agree that web 1.0 and the 1960-80 computer science field was a great example of classless movements. But they didn't come from communistic societies.
And the US now is the height of democracy, yes?
No? Not even a little bit.
Ohh it's big brain time!
The end stage of capitalism is mass extinction, a multi-national famine which is estimated to claim over 4 billion humans, and the potential to take down the earths biosphere if we reach self accelerating climate change.
nice attempt to control the conversation, but we're talking about capitalism, not communism.
You are talking about capitalism, you mean... they are talking about communism. Nice attempt to control the conversation while admonishing another for attempting to control the conversation, that's funny, you win a cookie.
p.s. this is not a one-topic-only discussion, even if you want it to be.
Thanks for your incredibly valuable input of nothing.
sure. so why not call it what it is?