this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2024
1099 points (97.8% liked)

Political Memes

5418 readers
3212 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes 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.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago (2 children)

That said, leftism is centralized economics.

Are you sure about that? </john cena>

You should tell that to the Democratic Socialists, or the Social Democrats, or Marxists, or actual Libertarians, or anarchists, or communists. Literally I think the only group on the left. That is significantly centrally organized are Marxist Leninist. Every group on the right however depends on a central authority to make their economy fesable.

Either this is projection, or you don't know what left is. Which if you are a fellow American is absolutely understandable. They did a lot to dumb us down and make us afraid to look to any groups that weren't capitalist or fascist. To help us meet our needs. That red scare shit is still prevalent to this day. Though the Marxist Leninist did hand them the talking point on a platter post world war II. The rest of the left just got smeared with it unduly.

[–] yboutros@infosec.pub -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I said it's feasible for smaller populations - but to be comparable to the size and strength of a world power AND have that sort of left wing economics how many examples can you provide that don't end up needing authoritarianism?

By the way, I have nothing against the left or authoritarianism. Some geographic regions lead to power dynamics where authoritarianism is just a more sensible form of management since constraints on necessary resources make it easy for militant groups to seize control.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Everything is feasible in smaller populations. That's why government should generally be smaller and more granular. It is also why businesses should be smaller still.

Just because insecure bullies make something impractical doesn't mean it's wrong. Nor does it mean that they are right.

[–] yboutros@infosec.pub 2 points 5 months ago

Yes, (most) everything is feasible in smaller populations (not nuclear maintenance for example). But without technology, they've been isolated, uncoordinated, and easily bullied by those larger organized authoritarian bodies. There are billions of people, and narcissists make up about 1 in 5 of those billions of people. A smaller subset lack basic empathy, and an even smaller subset are intellectually competent. Multiply whatever that probability is by billions of people, and you have a guaranteed concern for every single government on the planet.

I agree with wanting smaller businesses as well. Capitalism isn't bad (communism is state capitalism after all), but corporatism is the emerging problem from right libertarianism that most people conflate as problems with capitalism

My point being isn't that I don't like leftism, they are my ideals. I just don't believe we live in an ideal world, so practically I follow a different set of beliefs. Thay said, I do think leftism is compatible with libertarianism in a way that it can compete in the global arena. And that starts off with solving how a decentralized governmental body "identifies" one and only one person to their "identity" (otherwise you get Sybil attacks)

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Regardless of how you do decentralized economy you need a strong regulatory body to keep it that way. Otherwise you just end up right where we are now again.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yes and Humanity has done it for thousands of years without a large centralized National body. Anarchism is not without an ability to regulate. What do you think anarchism is?

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

We also didn't have a better way of doing math than an abacus for thousands of years. If Anarchy could regulate then we wouldn't need all these laws about minimum wage, not using children as disposable machine tools, and not putting rat poison in their food products. Clearly there is some need for a body that can do that. And at that point, You've got a large centralized national body again because you're going to need to vote for who you trust to do it, they're going to need the physical capability to do it, there's going to need to be taxes to keep it all going, and oh look. We have a national government again.