this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
668 points (97.2% liked)

Leftism

2103 readers
102 users here now

Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!

Rules:

Posting Expectations:

Sister Communities:

!abolition@slrpnk.net !antiwork@lemmy.world !antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world !breadtube@lemmy.world !climate@slrpnk.net !fuckcars@lemmy.world !iwwunion@lemmy.ml !leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com !leftymusic@lemmy.world !privacy@lemmy.world !socialistra@midwest.social !solarpunk@slrpnk.net Solarpunk memes !therightcantmeme@midwest.social !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world !vuvuzelaiphone@lemmy.world !workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world !workreform@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jlou@mastodon.social 23 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Socialism vs capitalism is a false dichotomy. There are other alternatives like economic democracy or mutualism where all companies are democratic worker coops. There are other critics of capitalism besides Marx such as the classical laborists like Proudhon and their modern intellectual descendants like David Ellerman

@leftism

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Economic democracy is just an aspect of a healthy socialist society.

Mutualism is a type of socialism.

The false dichotomy is between Leninism and liberalism.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The false dichotomy is between Leninism and liberalism.

Wait, are you implying these are the same thing?

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

A dichotomy is where there are only two choices or extremes. By saying it's a false dichotomy you are pointing out there are other options. It doesn't necessarily mean the two options from before are the same.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

By saying it’s a false dichotomy you are pointing out there are other options.

Ah, was a bit confused, because I've never seen anyone doubt the alternatives of Fascism or Anarchism.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Mutualism is not socialism as it has been defined in the 20th century @leftism

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)
  1. Proudhon referred to himself as a socialist.
  2. Revolutionary Catalonia, the Makhnovshina, and the MAREZ all existed in the 20th century. All of them had mutualist elements and called themselves socialist. The successors to the MAREZ, the CGALs, still exist and still consider themselves socialist.
[–] jlou@mastodon.social -4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Proudhon referred to himself as a socialist in the 19th century sense. Most people don't have what Proudhon advocated in mind when they use the term, socialism, today. It is clearer to use a different word, and also helps the left avoid any unnecessary negative associations and connotations

@leftism

[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You're not gonna dodge the negative associations for long. The bourgeoisie, state bureaucracy, and their useful idiots will just call you a woke radical left postmodern cultural neomarxist anyways. If you're gonna get called a socialist anyways, might as well insist on using the word as it was meant to be used, rather than ceding it to be used as an insult.

You also ignored point #2

[–] jlou@mastodon.social -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Classical laborists and their intellectual descendants' case against capitalism boils down to the idea that the positive and negative results of production are the private property of the workers in the firm. When understood properly, the unique arguments they make are that we should abolish capitalism in the name of private property. The left should lean into this framing. It's hard to call private property supporters Marxists.

Socialism doesn't clearly evoke those examples to people

@leftism

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why do you keep doing that thing at the bottom of your posts?

[–] shuzuko@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I think it's something to do with the fact that they're accessing a lemmy community from Mastodon.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

or mutualism where all companies are democratic worker coops

I think that Karl Marx might have described that as the workers controlling the means of production. In fact I think he had a word for that...

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 3 months ago

Marx wouldn't have described an economy that uses markets as socialist

@leftism

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago