• dartos@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yeah but capitalism also made reddit great, before making it terrible.

      There’s a balance in there somewhere. What we got ain’t it tho.

      • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        Reddit was never great lmaoo

        It was a pedo networking tool reknowned worldwide for it’s jailbate and non-consensual creepshots. These moderators received awards from admins. Then it got too much attention and got a PR workover, burning a woman CEO at the stake to satiate the gamer-fascists before becoming a bland Atlanticist CIA sockpuppet front of bland corporate posts.

        At no point during this entire thing did it ever approach anything comparable to greatness

      • Bobby_DROP_TABLES [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        There is no balance though, the shit-ification that happened to Reddit is a necessary function of capitalism. What we saw as Reddit at its best was, from a capitalist’s perspective, Reddit at its worst. I’m sure you’ve noticed a similar process taking place in lots of other areas as well.

        • quarrk [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          What we saw as Reddit at its best was, from a capitalist’s perspective, Reddit at its worst.

          And capitalists will allow this “at its worst” phase in order to capture the market, before squeezing it. This pattern is consistent in many industries.

        • dartos@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I may be wrong, but I don’t see socialism and capitalism as hard opposites.

          I see capitalism and communism are like hard opposites with socialism somewhere in between.

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Capitalism is the state controlled by the capital owners with the workers repressed.

            Socialism is the state controlled by the workers with the capital owners repressed.

            They are literally hard opposites. One is a bourgeoise-state and the other is a proletarian-state.

            • dartos@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              I learned that “capitalism” is an economic system, not a system of government.

              So you could have a socialist state that funds essentials like healthcare and transportation through taxes with a market (capitalist) economy.

              • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                That’s not a socialist state. It’s a capitalist state with welfare. If the political structure of the state itself has not been reworked to put the workers in power what you’re describing is just a state where the bourgeoisie (who control power) have decided to do welfare, usually for their own benefit such as reducing revolutionary energy by providing the workers with concessions (the welfare state). That is social democracy.

                You do not have socialism without overthrowing the hierarchy that places the bourgeoisie as the ruling class:

                Capitalism = Capitalists in power. Proles repressed.

                Socialism = Proletariat in power. Capitalists repressed.

                Communism = No more classes, only 1 class because the bourgeoisie have been completely phased out.

      • space_comrade [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Yeah but capitalism also made reddit great

        Engineers and designers made it great. Reddit could very well exist without capitalism (see Lemmy). What fucked up Reddit was explicitly capitalist incentives.

        • dartos@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Lemmy would not have existed without Reddit. Lemmy is a clone of reddit!

          Plus reddit put all the work intro attracting users and communities in the first place, before driving them to places like lemmy.

      • space_comrade [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Yes because people never communicated over the Internet before Glorious Visionary Entrepreneurs from the Great Private Sector took hold of it and gave us all these Valuable Products, they just sat on their ass wondering what to do with such technology like complete idiots.

        I swear free market ideology is the dumbest shit you can possibly believe in, I’d sooner become a fucking Mormon.

        • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          How would you have communicated without someone owning a server and paying for it? Reddit and other centralized platforms emerged for some reason… You would have to literally make that illegal, i.e. make it illegal to host your own server and let users use it.

          You can’t just imagine some fantasy utopia, and compare that to the current system.

          • space_comrade [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            How would you have communicated without someone owning a server and paying for it?

            You do realize the Internet first started being used by universities and the military, not the private sector, right? I see literally no reason why Internet infrastructure couldn’t be publicly owned. It could function pretty much like any other public utility.

            • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              And would it have grown into more than that? Into something that everyone, and not just military and scientists can use?

              • space_comrade [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                Why not?

                Sorry I just don’t buy into the ideology that the free market has this kind of “magic sauce” that makes everything innovative and better.

                The early Internet was filled of people doing all kinds of cool things for free just because it was interesting to do, the only thing the private sector did is provide the base infrastructure, this is something the state can easily do too. All kinds of communities, FOSS software and media popped up and none of them had VC funding or expected any money out of it.

                It was only in mid-late 2000 that capital really sank its teeth into the Internet properly.

    • Kidplayer_666@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I left Reddit because of short term decisions to squeeze money out of consumers to look good in an IPO, instead of having an actual long term thought.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        You left reddit because of capitalism. What is an IPO? It is the launch of a business onto the public capital markets to release equity and to enrich its existing owners. What do all businesses on the markets operate on? Short term growth for the next financial quarter optimised to enrich their investors (shareholders) in the shortest amount of time possible.

        Capitalism consistently destroys everything you enjoy and yet you defend it relentlessly while asking for long term thinking, which is not a feature of capitalism. When you wake up to this reality you might actually start to question “maybe the socialists are right about a few things” and spend some time with us learning what we actually believe.

        • Kidplayer_666@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          But you know what happened after Reddit turned to crap? Because no one actually has to use Reddit, because Reddit is just a bunch of bored nerds and Reddit is just a bunch of forums, eventually someone realised: “wait a minute, I can code this in a few weeks and make it way less crappy than most social media. And maybe if I make it all open, a whole ecosystem of social networks can grow together”. And when Reddit turned to crap, “the invisible hand” acted and people slowly started to migrate over to lemmy and other social media and now reddit is just a bunch of bots

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            A few weeks?

            Mate please check my profile. I have been here for 3 fucking years. Lemmy did not magically appear in a few weeks that is incredibly offensive to the sheer amount of work my comrades have put in to make it.

            And calling their work “the invisible hand of the market” is also nonsensical. Because the forces driving its creation, and the rest of us communists that support it, are the destruction of the markets. There is not one single jot of profit motive involved in Lemmy. You seem to recognise some of the problems of capitalism but consistently come to incorrect conclusions about everything because you have spent no time whatsoever getting a real political education and understanding the forces at work.

            And you fail to ask yourself what happens to your “market forces” alternative to reddit. In any scenario where the market is responsible for replacing reddit the market will also bring it back to exactly the same point of self-destruction through pursuit of capital. You will hurt yourself all over again.

  • SparrowHawk@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Your point is based on an idealistic and wishful “uncorruot government”. You cannot have an uncorrupt government. What’s needed is a different form of political decision making, one where the common folk participates in the political questions, not just some answers, where accountability is protected and a priority.

    I don’t know the exact blueprint for this, maybe it is as unattainable as an “uncorrupted government”. What I know is that nobody really tried it yet, while so called “liberal democracy” has proven its failings to all and the fascist have been taking advantage of those failings since the start. The only way yo avoid this is to change our questions, not to all agree on the answers

  • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I think you will find any place thats well moderated and cracks down on bigotry and hatespeech will skew left.

    Weird how that is, huh?

  • RangerJosie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    It can. In theory.

    The theoretical part is the “uncorrupt government” you speak of.

    The only way to keep a govt “uncorrupt” as you put it is under pain of literal death. And even then its not foolproof. Some will still be tempted.

    If you want a govt that will serve the people while being as incorruptible as possible you have to choose politicians by lottery instead of election. They get called, go serve, then go back to the life they had before. Like 4 years of Jury Duty. Political graspers, climbers, those will always trend towards corruption. Like that old addage, anyone actively seeking political office is unfit to serve in that capacity as their motivations are suspect. Power, authority, etc. All that is only intensified in a system as inconceivably corrupt and broken as ours is.

  • dodgy_bagel@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I’m actually very centrist; I don’t want to eat the rich.

    After all, I’m a vegan and think that anyone involved in the meat industry should be put in jail.

    So, dead center. That’s me.

  • Pectin8747@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    My experience has been the opposite. I’ve found that the majority of users tend to lean towards neoliberal and center-right ideologies. I guess most of them are probably American, so their warped worldview has them considering these ideologies as ‘left-wing’ instead 🙃

  • Barometer3689@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I thought left also meant protection against unregulated markets? Without regulations it is just going to be capitalismplusplus.

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Hexbear also has a large number of Putin and CCP apologists. Authoritarian bootlicking isn’t liberalism.

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Pushing Native Americans onto reservations lifted a lot of European immigrants out of poverty.

          Burning fossil fuels lifted entire nations out of poverty.

          Campaigns against the barbarians lifted many Romans out of poverty.

          If you think this “lift” is some example of public good in action that hasn’t come at the cost of exploitation, you’re delusional.

          • Krause [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            China lifted 800 million people out of poverty by building healthcare, transport, housing, jobs, education and food security? Heh, but what about that time European settlers got richer by genociding Native Americans? Technically that was “poverty reduction” too, commie smuglord

          • RedDawn [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Chinese poverty elimination didn’t come on the backs of any of those things you goober. “Well have you considered that sometimes OTHER countries did bad things to reduce domestic poverty, and therefore China doing so is inherently bad actually !?” Grow the fuck up, this isn’t a real argument.

    • Wanderer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Well that’s just bullshit. Markets have brought more people out of poverty than anything.

        • KurtVonnegut [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Lib - “Markets make everything cheaper, which is good.”

          Leftist - “But if there is a labor market, won’t that make labor cheaper?”

          Lib - “Yes, and that is good.”

          Leftist - “How is that good?”

          Lib - “It leads to more profits.”

          Leftist - “But why is it good to have more profits?”

          Lib - “Because a good country is when corporations make profits, and the more profits the corporations make, the gooder the country is.”

          • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Love to spend insane amounts of resources on creating a phone that has the same tech and capabilities as all the other phones, but I can’t just get access to their research and they can’t just get access to mine.
            Love to spend insane amount of time working up a cure to covid, but I can’t share my research with others and they can’t share it with me, yay this is awesome.
            Love to spend insane amount of resources working out how to make people want to buy a sugary drink and then spend even more to make them want to buy my drink specifically.
            Love to build empty houses and love to create 1.21 times more food than we need.
            Love to do all this as the world is burning and people are starving.
            Capitalism is the most efficient distribution of resources

          • wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Kid: “Mommy, what’s a strawman?”

            Mother: “Take a look a this post here. See how they speak for both sides of the argument?”

            Kid: “Yes, they’re arguing with themselves.”

            Mother: “Exactly, and they can make their opponent say what they want.”

            Kid: “That seems like an easy way to make your argument look good”

            Mother: "Yes. It’s like fighting someone who can’t put up any resistance. They could be made of straw. A strawman. "

            Kid: “Oh, I see.”

            • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              You didn’t engage with their argument, but good try nonetheless. It’s nice to see you cling to a fallacy rather than engage in good-faith discussion of an argument clearly illustrated for you to relate to.

      • invalidusernamelol [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Primitive accumulation is a bad term. It works if you’ve read the theory behind it, but otherwise it sounds like someone saving up a bunch of money then starting a successful business compared to what it is which was colonial genocide, enclosure of the commons, and mass starvation as people were ripped from agricultural labor and cast into the factories and mines to work for feudal lords turned industrial capitalists.

  • tracyspcy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    There is not such thing as middle class, pure sophistic. There are only 2 classes, proletariat and bourgeoisie.