514
Freedom (thelemmy.club)
submitted 1 month ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/socialism@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 63 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Also "free speech" that doesn't apply to corporate platforms. Which is, you know, all of them. Love when a liberal says "that doesn't count, they're a private business" whenever you point out the blatant censorship in the West.

[-] RiverRock@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 month ago

Whole fuckin country is a private business

load more comments (118 replies)
[-] thenextguy@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago

Not “somehow”. Quite easily. Advertising works. People are easily influenced. It wasn’t sudden; it happened little by little over a long time.

[-] PunkMonk@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Most people do not naturally develop an advanced political education by themselves, they've got their own lives to deal with. A peasant could not hold their own in a complex economics debate with a King because they weren't even taught to read nonetheless learn the intricacies of Middle Age politics.

There is a similar thing going on in the modern world, where sure most people can now read but only the capitalist class for the most part gets to access the highest levels of education. And without the tools to see beyond your cultural norms, to analyse whether they are right or wrong or being lucky enough to be born with the right brain to see past it, what can you even do?

[-] lemonwood@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 month ago

Also, all those brands of shampoo are owned by one or two firms.

[-] belochka@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

I've just realized that this is much like having multiple identities.

A way to deceive market reputation mechanisms.

Should be made illegal, there should be one main brand seen on everything, then whatever secondary brand they want is possible, but you should clearly see that those 3 niche-optimized goods are from one corp.

So that the choice were, eh, real.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] 001Guy001@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 month ago

"Ha nice try! That is not real capitalism! You think workplaces would just give workers health insurance under a free market? They would just tell sick workers to figure it out themselves and replace them with healthy ones if needed!"

"Some of the first evidence of compulsory health insurance in the United States was in 1915, through the progressive reform protecting workers against medical costs and sicknesses in industrial America. Prior to this, within the Socialist and Progressive parties, health insurance and coverage was framed as not only an economic right for workers' health, but also as an employer's responsibility and liability—healthcare was in this context centered on working-class Americans and labor unions." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance_in_the_United_States#The_rise_of_employer-sponsored_coverage)

[-] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Freedom is when toothbrush.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2026
514 points (97.8% liked)

Socialism

6787 readers
20 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS