this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
543 points (80.7% liked)

Leftism

2262 readers
3 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:

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Solarpunk memes [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

I think there's a simpler, more personal way to make this point. Here's a few thought experiments:

Imagine you work for a company that lays you off, even while doing enough stock buybacks and executive bonuses such that they could've paid your salary for 1000 years. After you get laid off, imagine what would happen if you just ignored them and continued doing your work.

Or, your landlord doesn't renew your lease because they think you're ugly and they don't want ugly people living in their building. Imagine what happens if you just stay, even if you keep sending the landlord their monthly rent on time.

Both of these situations end with armed, taxpayer-funded agents physically removing you from the premises by any means necessary; it is only the omnipresent threat of state violence that keeps capitalist control over their private property. We don't see the violence because we've been trained from an early age not just to accept it, but to not even see it.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

^ This is the winner, right here. The crux, as it were.

Modern society always ultimately boils down, eventually, to might makes right... just with some extra steps.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I agree with you. That said, as humans, we're not yet evolved past defending territory we've chosen to live on. I think we still need "might" as an option for response, until we as a creator evolve further.

I don't know if it's possible to get rid of the final might destination on the continuum of responses to issues, but I think we can agree that the "extra steps" part between "an annoyance" and "possible danger to individuals and society" is extremely lacking and narrow.

I strongly, strongly dislike what the police have become, and evolved from, in the united States. Someone does need to investigate crime and murder though, and not just a few amateur podcasters. With some careful thought, and likely messy experimentation, we can handle laws being just, fair and useful. How? That seems to be the tricky part.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

"Warfare is of vital importance to the state, it is a matter of life and death." -Sun Tzu.

A hundreds of years old warlord recognized this, it's a thought independent of economics. As long as there's more than one nation-state on this planet, might is always the end result, including defense from an aggressor.

The idea of inherent violence solely being a capitalist trait doesn't tell the whole truth because the need for might exists as long as there's power dynamic, which exists as long as there is govt.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Has anyone claimed that violence has never occurred outside a context of capitalism?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I strongly, strongly dislike what the police have become, and evolved from, in the united States. Someone does need to investigate crime and murder though, and not just a few amateur podcasters. With some careful thought, and likely messy experimentation, we can handle laws being just, fair and useful. How? That seems to be the tricky part.

That’s not exclusive to capitalism .

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

True, but as an organization, protection of property seems to be their primary focus in more capital-centric societies.

I'm speaking from an admittedly limited experience, having lived in the US most of my life, so I welcome any other perspective or ideas.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I’m also from the US, and haven’t lived abroad. It did rise to my awareness in this exchange, having recently begun trying to process Bob Altemeyer’s The Authoritarians

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Private property is the cause of the greatest social disparities, and protecting it is essential for our current systems to preserve themselves.

It should be no surprise that it is implicated in much of the greatest violence in our society.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I've seen a few solutions to the private property idea posited. I'll admit my biases, they made me uncomfortable, mainly because they cannot be the only piece of the machine altered.

For ex, there's a very large company near me that allows one to purchase land to build a house on, but that land is your family's for 99 years before ownership reverts to the corporation.

I can't really see the upside for any family, investing a lot of money into property that simply... Vanishes after a time. But that was one of the solutions I previously reviewed, no true ownership. Most of the other ideas were tweaks on that central idea.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I don't know if it's possible to get rid of the final might destination on the continuum of responses to issues

Perhaps the issues themselves are not inevitable.

[–] Gorilladrums 1 points 1 year ago

This will ALWAYS be the case. That's just our reality. The question then becomes, who should have the might and how should it be applied? Looking at history, giving power to the state ultimately leads to the most stability because there is no competition for power. If the state is democratic then the people get to decide when and how force should be used.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (39 children)

Very true, although I can't think of a better solution than having the state monopolize violence and enforce things like personal property etc and that's not necessarily anything specific to capitalism either.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Some very smart and imaginative anarchist philosophers have been working on exactly that for a very long time, from Mikhail Bakunin 200 years ago to more modern writers like Noam Chomsky or David Graeber. I think their work is worthwhile.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I haven't found Chomskys work to be convincing... it's always so... extra...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think it's extra. Quite the opposite. If anything, it could use a little extra, because it's extremely dry and academic.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I think we used the slang version of extra differently is all.

[–] Gorilladrums 1 points 1 year ago

Chomsky is a genocide denier. I wouldn't even entertain anything he says

load more comments (38 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

This applies in general to copyright.

It's bullshit that exists solely by the power of the state. It only exists as long as we all agree it exists, ever person on the planet. It has only existed for a few centuries but no one can imagine a world without.

Capitalism is the same except worse since no one can agree on what capitalism means. The solution is always to capitalism harder.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Not playing devils advocate by choice: there are systems in place (at least in more democratic countries) that force the employer and the landlord to keep you if you havent done anything wrong.

At will employment is an american joke.

Still, paying more for the shareholders and CEOs than the actual work your water, food and transportation needs is insane.

The idea that I can buy my way around laws and others rights is disgusting to the core.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is a great comment. Thanks for this.

load more comments (1 replies)