Yeah! And we need to do it in a way where the incredibly rich and powerful who have a vested interest and desparate need for us to fail won’t kill our movement! In the past and present, any socialist movement was met with
- death squads
- propaganda
- military invasions
- assasinations of heads of state
- funding, arming, and training the opposition
- economic sanctions
- so, so much propaganda
all funded by the absurdly wealthy to make nations fail and make them more amenable to re-exploitation by the owning class.
Any ideas to defend ourselves against this phenomenon which occurs over and over again?
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
This huge problem stems from “we need”. Collectivism leads to hierarchy, because a collective isn’t semantically compatible to one person. A collective can’t be responsible, a collective can’t make a decision, a collective can’t think, a collective can’t speak in one voice. But collectivism means trying to treat a collective like one person. Leading to dictatorships.
TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
You talk as if with corporations a single person can be held responsible…
You can have syndicates and get close to socialism
Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Thats then syndicalism which is a form of socialism
TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Yeah but only when it’s the dominant form of doing business? We have a bunch of them in my country but we’re definitely still capitalism.
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
Show me where.
TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
My country has a bunch of syndicates, even some big coops, it’s not uncommon in Europe. You just need the legal structures for it.
IronBird@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
shit, the average public corporation is a more representative democracy than the US actual government is.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
With voting power weighted by the amount of money they have invested.
Kind of like the way the US actually works.
drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I had to scroll back up to make sure I was stilling the same thread
jjlinux@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Finally, someone had to say it. While capitalism is far from perfect, I’d rather have billionaire capitalist assholes that I can then calm on their bullshit than so-called ‘socialism’ which is just the pretty way to call a dictatorship. Show me one ‘socialist’ country that has thrived. One, come on.
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 3 weeks ago
OK, I can name one. It’s Israel. Before 90s it was (administratively, politically, socially) socialist (not like marxist, but with collectives and communes and kibbutz, and much of economy being state monopolies). One reason after 90s everything changed about it was because there were certain reforms which, eh, significantly raised level of life, making all the old institutions unpopular. So it’s no more socialist in anything.
A-and, of course, the part about collectivism was present. Some things I’ve heard about Israel before 90s emotionally reminisce USSR. Sort of a procrustean bed of a society, if you don’t fit it’s your problem.
phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Calling pre-1990s Israel socialist is like calling the Confederate States of America democratic.
Yeah, it was, except for a large disenfranchised population.