Skip Navigation

User banner
Egon [they/them]
Egon [they/them] @ Egon @hexbear.net
Posts
0
Comments
525
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • regulations, what Lemmy would say "a leftist".

    "I'm as left as they come" lmao. Dawg you're a capitalist, you're a liberal. Learn your terminology.

    But, you see, I also believe in democracy. It's slow, but it's a noble idea where citizens are able to decide who governs over the country, and have a say in policy shaping. I personally like being able to vote and go on protests. If the people of Taiwan want to vote, let them vote. It's their lives.

    Yeah me too, which is why I'm against a military dictatorship installed by the United States, existing on an island where it murdered millions of indigenous people to exist as a possible launch-board for future invasions despite the fact that the will of the people on the island and off it overwhelmingly supported and supports unification. It's this weird thing I like called "doing things despite the United States being against it"

  • Force is not the primary, way or even secondary, that capitalism is maintained, it's division and diversion.

    Get it thru your dense head: Division and diversion, arrests, lies all of these things can only be, because they are insured by the backbone of state-monopolized violence. How is this so hard to get? No one is saying that tanks are.out in the streets every day, the point is that there is an implicit knowledge that the oppressors can always turn to violence - or force - to maintain the status quo.

  • I have yet to call you a name or make an assumption - I've pointed out the actions you've taken. "You smuglords" clearly being in the plural. Please work on your reading comprehension.
    If you think having your behaviour pointed out to you is "name calling" consider wether you're just a piece of shit.
    Also again you refuse to engage with argument presented to you. Since you refuse good faith discussion, why do you think you deserve anything other than ridicule? You're clearly a moron

  • Holodomor for fun.

    The holodomor was the famine you doofus. It was also not an action taken deliberately by the Soviet government, and historians and scholars agree that the holodomor didn't target Ukraine specifically - it was instead a famine that.hit the Soviet Union as a result of years of war. Do you not know your hostory?

    Right now, the whole world has, through various efforts, has solved the global food production issue.

    Right now millions are starving, despite there being more than enough food.
    You still haven't answered the question.

    That the soviets and china managed to solve this aspect of it too is not a win for socialism, especially given the mass starvation that accompanied their efforts, but I see (and correct me if I have misunderstood) you and others holding this up as some kind of tenuous proof of superiority.

    That the soviets and the Chinese managed to eliminate famine in a region that had been plagued by famine since history could account for it, is not an immense accomplishment? Cope. It most certainly is, especially when you bring up the discussion of starvation.

    Social inequality and the denial of what I believe are basic human rights (food, housing, safety, access to healthcare, and freedom of expression), OTOH, are a continuing problem world-wide.

    Issues that the soviets and the Chinese made far greater dents I to, than anything modern capitalist governments do.

    am much more interested in efforts here - both local, regional, and global.

    So again, since you care so much about famines, and the current system has constant famines despite ha ing more than enough food available, and the soviets and the Chinese managed to eliminate famine, what system do you support? You surely cannot be a capitalist, since so many people are starving to death every day in capitalist countries. Millions are starving in the us alone. What do you think should be done?

  • Or they can enjoy the fact that they have regulatory capture and change the regulations, as has been seen historically.
    For practical observance: Denmark pays a wage to university students. The function of this wage is to make sure the students can focus on their studies, instead of having to have a job that demands time from them, which would lower the quality of education.
    Students also need housing, which the private sector provides in the form of "student housing", which requires you to be a student in order to live there. This "student housing" has a rent that is usually, approximately right around the student wage - thus meaning the student needs to take a job in order to afford things such as "food" and "electricity". This state of affairs occured despite regulations.

  • this she relates to how many Uyghur people are "actually in power.

    She would be more or less right, they Uyghurs aren't being persecuted https://xinjiangahr.carrd.co/ or at least not how most libs seem to think of it. There is something to be said of the schools, but it's a far cry from the accusations the west has thrown out (and then recanted because the accusations were lies).

    She thinks Taiwan (and Hongkong) belongs to China because it has always historically belonged to China.

    Well she would then be in agreement with both the official policy of the ROC and the PRC, so that would be pretty reasonable.

  • Lmao they actually went on about Uyghurs and taiwan. They talked to an actual Chinese person and discounted their perspective that the Uyghurs weren't being persecuted and the attitude of both the ROC and the PRC that there is one Taiwan lmao

  • Why would what people your country has matter?

  • I still disagree with this statement, insofar as it makes it seem like Scandinavia is more reliant on the third world than any other imperialist country.
    This statement makes it seem like if the us just did enough imperialism it'd finally get healthcare. That's obviously not the case. It works as a shield for the American liberals to explain why they do not have healthcare.

    The welfare state was a concession won by labour movements in Scandinavia. These concessions could be afforded due to the fact that the Scandinavian countries benefitted from empire - though such a benefit is not necessary for welfare to be present, as has been shown by the many aes states that provide services for their citizens.
    Dismissing this victory of labour as "a product of imperialism" diminishes what we can accomplish. We should critique Scandinavia and be aware that those countries - like the rest of the west - benefit from empire. We should however not correlate the existence with a welfare state with participation in empire.
    The largest Scandinavian companies don't pay their taxes, the welfare state is primarily funded for by outsized taxes on the poor and the "middle class". The upper classes in Scandinavia have been embroiled in countless tax fraud scandals.

    It's not to say that Scandinavia doesn't benefit from imperialism or that the existence of the countries as they are now aren't reliant on exploitation of the third world - they are.

    It is to say that the statement "Scandinavia can only be the way that it is due to imperialism" implies that with sufficient imperialism the us would turn into Scandinavia (it wouldn't) and that Scandinavia somehow does more imperialism than the us or other puppet masters.

  • Kid, Scandinavia is falling apart. It's being hollowed out by neoliberal regimes like those that hollowed out the UK a few decades ago.
    Even before being hollowed out, the place was far from perfect. There has always been homeless and exploited immigrants. One of the largest Scandinavian firms is Mærsk, which ships all over the world - mainly using underpaid labor.

    None of the "good stuff" is paid for by these companies anyway - they're just cheating with their taxes like anyone else - it's paid for mainly by taxes of the lower and middle classes (when you're wealthy enough you put your money in a tax haven). At that point it's not "well regulated markets" it's outsized taxes on the part of the population with least resources available to them.
    Is it better than the us? Very much so, but it's not even close to good

  • I can't really speak for a site - it's users are not a monolith - but the general culture is that you are not owed a good faith discussion , if you clearly aren't interested in one. If you look you'll notice that when people ask questions they get them asnwered, but when they try to make gochas or they get embroiled in an argument, but then don't respect the other well enough to respond to their queries, then it turns into shotposting. And why wouldn't it? Why would I wanna spend energy validating some doofus that's pretty obviously just trying to troll? Why would I validate someone's opinion on something they obviously know nothing about, when I've shared sources and knowledge which they then disregard in order to continue knowing nothing?

  • I gotta say I don't really see how Biden has made things better. Climate change is still not being taken seriously, were embroiled in yet another war, the military budget has been increased yet again, more people died of covid under Biden, abortion isn't a right anymore, LGBTQ are more threatened, the police has gotten more funding, Europe is entering a recession due to following America's demands of cutting off Russian fuel, the US is pretty likely to enter a recession as well.
    If you're interested in these left-wing critiques I'd recommend watching "some more news".

    I chose hexbear because it was created by old r/chapotraphouse users in anticipation of the sub getting banned - incidentally for "calls for violence" though the only example Reddit could make was us calling for "death to slavers".
    I've stayed here because of its pro LGBTQ-stance and its great and knowledgeful userbase wrt discussions of news and world events. It's the only place where I don't see people take news at face value, but instead investigate the truth of claims - no matter where the claims come from. It's the only place where I've seen such skepticism be hailed rather critiqued

  • I mean this takedown was just wonderful

  • You are already engaged in a discussion, which you engaged by posting and then responding to posts. Your responses are then show. To be in bad faith, since you are not willing to interact with the argumens other users present in good faith. This is typical of you libs, but it is an unfortunate side effect that good and educating discussion gets drowned out by you uneducated idiots that think a link to Wikipedia means anything... Good education is drowned out by you smuglords that fail to realise civility is a two-way street. These snide comments you make are then further expounded by other snide idiots, which further muddies the waters and ruins discussion, it doesn't seem like an effective strategy to me, because you get called out on it, that is what you all want to do and sadly the only thing that can be done in response is to not take you seriously until you either get too hurt that your idiotic comments results in similarly asinine responses or you get too hurt from the people calling you on your bullshit and you defederate

  • Both imperial Russia and Qing China were plagued by frequent famines, I don't see how it is damnng that the PRC and the USSR had a famine in their early years of existence (after they'd fought long and drawn out wars), when they then never had famines again.
    There a millions of people starving in the us today, in Europe, in africa, in south America, in the middle east, in India. There is more than enough food, but somehow these capitalist countries have millions starving. The us has kids missing lunch in school, despite food being available in cafeterias.
    If one famine once in a region that used to be plagued by famines is too much for you, what does this ever-present famine then mean to you? What system do you suppose we make use of? Surely you cannot be a capitalist, since you are so staunchly against people starving

  • The us situation is not uniquely fucked. I used the us because it's a clear example, but every country has a prison population, which is one of many examples of force being used to maintain the current system.
    I think you think that this concept of force might be a qualifier of something bad - it isn't. A revolution would also take force, fighting against capitalists would also take force.
    Converting "hearts and minds" is all well and good, but when the capitalists coup you (which they will) you're gonna need force to maintain your system

  • if cops were Thanos snapped capitalism would not go awa.

    Yeah because that's not the only way that the systw. Is maintained by the threat of violence, it's just the most obvious. You keep making points like "you're gonna have to organize and fight" as if that disproves that the current system is maintained by violence. I think you don't quite understand what's being talked about

  • Post the non-debunked sources then, it shouldn't be difficult.
    Edit: Yet again I ask a lib for sources and they disappear. It's incredible. I responded within a minute, and they have nothing lmao. It's always like this