agamemnonymous

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yes! Whenever I go camping, my body just figures it out for days.

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

Yes? These are not mutually exclusive means.

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

Eh, good content was less and less common in a sea of low effort fluff and reposts. Once I started actively blocking subreddits I didn't care about, I got deeper into the fluff much more quickly.

There will always be nerds pooling quality content. Reddit was the best place for that for a while, but like all pools it had grown stagnant. I'm excited to witness the revitalization afforded by migration. The site is just a site. It was nice, but all things must pass, and metamorphize in passing.

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

That's precisely my point. The movement is up against capitalists with resources to soil the term. Faith in truth and education isn't going to do it. These policies need punchy branding that can't be villainized without subverting market economies themselves. Carving out a portion of the left from neo-liberals just dilutes voting power and hands elections to fascists. The only viable solution is branding to pull voters from the left and right wing bases.

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

I disagree. I don't think waiting for conservative reactionaries to die out is a viable methodology. Yes, millennials and gen Z slant left, but it's not unanimous (I know several personally who grew up petit bourgeoisie and think capitalism is the only way) and gen X will be around for decades to come. Deciding that the hypnotized are worthless is not viable. The policies are popular, we need to reach those who would benefit on a broad scale before 2060.

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

You say that, and yet right wing politicians consistently win elections by doing exactly that. Policies that explicitly hurt right wing voters at the benefit of the bourgeoisie are hidden behind bluster and culture war hot button issues.

That said, I'm not advocating ignorance. There's no "Gotcha!" moment. I'm advocating an honest movement which merely chooses less stigmatized, and less stigmatizable, vocabulary to express its sincere policies.

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

Are you referring to the hammer and sickle? That's just the logo for the "Socialism" community, and is only present because I posted this here. I don't necessarily advocate using it for the proposed movement.

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

I'm not sure I understand, could you clarify your point?

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

Healthcare and UBI are generally considered "politically" socialist. The one actually (economically) socialist concept I brought up was workplace socialization. A co-op or ESOP model gives the workers in a company meaningful ownership thereof: if the shareholders and employees of a company are the same group, profits go to the workers.

 

Socialism has garbage marketing, full stop. Probably because those who specialize in marketing tend to thrive in, and thus gravitate to, capitalist frameworks. Consequentially, a great many members of the working class are propagandized into reflexive rejection of socio-economic policies that would greatly benefit them, based on taboo buzzwords and false equivalences.

Yes, established terminology is quite useful for nuanced discussion in leftist spaces, among those who understand the distinctions between "communism", "socialism", "democratic socialism", "social democracy", "command economy", "State capitalism", and "totalitarian dictatorship". But for many people, those are all synonyms. "Socialism" means gulags and breadlines and the government stealing your stuff to give it to slackers.

I propose a reactionary framework. A movement committed to abandoning familiar terminology in favor of capitalist buzzwords. Driving a wedge between "capitalism" and "market economies", leveraging discontent of blue collar workers against big business and political cronyism.

It's not universal healthcare, it's alleviating the unfair healthcare burden on small businesses. It's not universal welfare, it's freeing business owners by replacing the minimum wage with a prosperity dividend. It's not a socialized workplace, it's an equity compensation initiative.

The established terms are poisoned, but the actual concepts are widely popular, if you phrase them right. The movement cannot thrive by trying to carve out a portion of the "leftist" party, it has to draw support from the entire working class. The only way to accomplish this is by abandoning the poisoned terms in favor of business terms that cannot be twisted by capitalists without destroying their own platform.

Thoughts?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Take my upvote good sir