this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2025
925 points (97.4% liked)

Political Memes

9138 readers
1724 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.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't consider myself part of the "ownership class".

My main point is that the ownership/worker distinction is not binary. Most people are both (in very different proportions).

But my secondary point is that even the small investor has some (slight) power to influence which is usually not exercised.

[–] degen@midwest.social 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Stakeholding is a long way from ownership in any meaningful sense. The "varying proportions" here are all on the coattails of capital from whichever angle you look.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's only a long way from control of the company.

It's full ownership in terms of receiving a proportional share of the profits of the workers. That part is very meaningful.

[–] degen@midwest.social 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's kind of my point though. Control is real ownership. What we experience can really only be construed to ownership in name. Especially with the way financial systems work, built by capital, the vast majority of individual investors expressly do not own their stake in their names.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

A silent partner (through choice or circumstance) is just as much a member of the capitalist class as the hands on partner. They reap the same rewards. They exploit the same workers.

Only in a co-operative setup can the worker and owner class be in balance.

[–] degen@midwest.social 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I see where you're coming from and why you're drawing that line. My thought is that so many of those investors are not functioning as capitalists considering that they are still workers at the end of the day. They need to participate because of the way things are, where I suppose my idea of a "true" capitalist simply chooses to exploit in order to claim more. I do think there's a difference between choice and circumstance in that way.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Totally. Most 401k holders don't even realise they own companies, never mind thinking about moving their money into something better fitting their particular political and investment philosophies