Technology
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Post guidelines
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
And what economic system fails to allow the money to flow to the top? The Soviets tried socialism as a ladder to communism, were about instantly corrupted. Any system we wish to discuss has to take human behavior into account, and not idealized human behavior.
The government has to be the brake, and the people have to have the education in history, math, politics, current affairs and critical thinking to power that engine.
Now the trick becomes keeping the wealthy from taking that education. I have no answer.
Socialism works in small groups, no better system. But we didn't evolve to work in groups of more than 150-200 individuals, let alone 8 billion.
Anyway, I posted more on c/unpopularopinion. I'm sure I'm taking a beating over there. :)
https://lemmy.world/post/38200626
A system where you take money out of the equation. You’re right that we have to take human behaviour into account. That’s one of the more prominent critiques for Marx by neo-marxists. I’m not saying that we replace capitalism overnight. The technological progress brought about by capitalism has lifted billions out of poverty (albeit at the cost of irreparable damage to the biosphere) but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t strive for a better system. In the meantime, being aware of the pitfalls of capitalism and trying to build class consciousness and a more equitable society is still a worthwhile goal to have. It took hundreds of years for capitalism to evolve and entrench, going from feudalism to Industrialization and now Technological Oligarchy. It pervades so much of our thought, culture and way of life that any proposed alternative is seen as wildly radical. We have to learn to gradually disengage from it if we hope to bring lasting change.
For what it’s worth Lenin himself said that the USSR was state capitalist and not socialist. Lenin wanted to create socialism from the top down, establishing a dictatorship that takes control of the means of production (state capitalism) and then gives it to the workers later. This never happened because when Stalin came to power he just decided state capitalism = socialism. There are however different ways to try to achieve socialism eg the democratic socialist way or the original Marxist way
When somebody casually says the word "dictatorship" as a serious solution to a problem, they have already failed.
This wasn’t a literal dictatorship but a “dictatorship of the proletariat” which, for Lenin, meant a democratic centralist government run by the communist party. Their is some deviation between Lenin’s and Marx definitions of “dictatorship of the proletariat”, however the main idea is a proletariat government that oppresses the bourgeois, mainly by seizing their means of production.
Sounds like a dictatorship ran by one party.
No, they tried communism as a ladder to socialism, entered the dictatorship of the proletariat phase, and were instantly corrupted. Because, you know... dictatorship.
Lenin's idea of socialism will never work, because it is far too optimistic, and does not factor the corruptibility of humans. Every single example of communism that has ever plagued a country is a prime illustration of that failure.