seeigel @ seeigel @feddit.org

Posts

0

Comments

312

Joined

5 mo. ago

Xi Jinping is the son of a high ranking politician. How is that not some form of class dynamics?

Socialism does work

USSR failed by having to import grain, while having black earth.

But I am not opposing Socialism.

My point is that right-wing people shouldn't be ignored, especially not to the point of seeing them as enemies.

The upper class is using the split to reign. Insisting on a solution that has room for improvement locks in the current situation.

the bourgeoisie has been suppressed by Proletarian States, your hypothesis isn’t accurate

But there are priviliged positions of power within those states. It's just another form to organize power. Those positions will not be available to everybody.

The idea of trying to synthesize a new ideology of left combined with right historically is Social Democracy,

That can't be all.

As you write, it doesn't work so something else should be tried.

You could name the main hurdle without becoming a tutor.

Of course there are reasons like no time from working two jobs or union busting behavior as seen from Starbucks or Amazon.

But that leaves enough workers who could run the union.

The main problem is convincing all minimum wage workers to join the union. Somebody has to come up with the necessary communication strategy. Whoever can do that most likely doesn't work a minimum wage job.

Leftist analysis, which is correct.

Leftist analysis is not correct if the proletariat is stuck where it is.

Not all desires are valid

I would say, not all enactments of desires are acceptable, but invalidating desires by themselves sounds wrong to me. Who decides which desires are valid?

blaming government as the issue when really it’s the fault of Capitalism

Having a strong government to oppose Capitalism doesn't help either. Capitalism is just one form of maintaining power. The people with capital will become the people at the top of the government if Capitalism is abolished by government.

Why not go full Hegel, treat left and right as thesis and antithesis and come up with something new?

MLK was killed because he was trying to overcome the suppression. It is the workers' abilities because leaders could have picked up where he was stopped. There are no leaders, which to me means, there are no abilities.

What else?

From the point of view of the right, the left government is maintaining overbearing zoning laws and medical regulations. These left politics retain the profits for the upper class in the current Capitalist system.

It's the separation of the proletariat that uphelds Capitalism, not one side alone.

A unified proletariat doesn't have to be left. Restricting analysis to dialectical materialism misses that people also care about other things. The left would already have convinced the entire proletariat if it's only materialism.

It's the arrogance of already knowing how to resolve social issues that keeps the left stuck in the past. The left is all about respecting people and their emotions and desires, but when they are expressed in the form of right-wing support, they are called reactionary and ignored.

Capitalism and fascism is not what the proletarian right wants.

The main differences are that the right accepts social, class differences while the left wants socialized support and unity. On the other hand the left wants individual personal differences while the right wants uniform values.

It's not about gaining things from the right but overcoming differences. There doesn't have to be left and right. Then both sides can change society together and make a better world instead of fighting each other for the benefit of the upper class.

That's part of the argument. If it is condescending to you then no minimum wage is needed because minimum wage workers could form a union.

Instead of replying to each comment, one big reply here.

Minimum wage works for jobs where people are underpaid because they outcompete each other and drive prices down. It's essentially a forced union for unskilled workers which is fair because they don't have the mental capacity to organize themselves.

But listening closely to Roosevelt, 'any right to continue' means that those businesses that don't supress the wages cease to exist. This ends poverty because those people become unemployed and thus don't count as low income anymore.

As long as there are illegal immigrants who earn less than legal residents, the minimum wage is not really the minimum wage. To be fair, illegal immigrants go to California, New York and Florida while states without own mimimum income laws are mostly southern states.

The real probelm is https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_army_of_labour

If there were enough jobs, there would be no competition to go below the poverty line.

Additionally, the main problem must be the housing market. Create cheap housing and huge parts of the income don't go to rent. It's almost funny that the cheap workers who work in construction cannot build cheap housing for themselves, thanks to zoning laws.

Overall, why should minimum wage work if it would be ridiculous to do that for comfortable wages? If there were a law prohibiting any job that doesn't pay enough to own a house with pool, we wouldn't expect that everybody would own such a house. We would expect that the majority of people would be unemployed. Why should that be different for lowpaying jobs?

How should it be possible to leave poverty behind with minimum wage? It's the minimum. Only people without work can have less.

It's unfortunate but those who make the least are inevitable the ones who are poor. Not calling it poor is misleading.

Yet veterans in comment sections of police shootings say that they have better trigger discipline when they are policing an area.

Soviet Union was authoritarian. Both the far left and the far right don't want authoritarianism but claim the other side does.

Fascism, when state and companies become one, is the opposite of a small state, a major goal of the right.

So from a right wing perspective, the left and globalists must be in power if they are not living freely in a country with a small state.

Left and right should talk. There are many things that they can achieve together.

How much time would you need and what would you do?

Just don't do any crimes.

\s

That segregation, was that in the entire USA? How was it introduced for the entire USA when the North fought for the freedom of the black population?

All your points are opportunities. Some should just not be taken immediately. When in Europe, it's not good to start with traveling earth, think Gallileo. When in America, it's better to build weapons first before contacting Europe.

First I would seek the attention of the local ruler by cooking interesting dishes with modern knowledge.

Then I would ask him to create an akademy. I don't know the details but I know what can be known. Intelligent people will reinvent the knowledge.

Some side businesses should make enough money that the akademy and thus further development doesn't entirely rely on the king.

Build cities with public transport and no cars, because there is no car.

Success.

By design. Look at the origin of Texas.

is this what you mean by first mover advantage?

Yes.