Great stuff! I love how you take a moment to call out the alt-right on its stupidity and political ineptness. Your post's aesthetics are a bit weird, perhaps. Almost edgy. The thumbnail and subtitel are mildly reminiscent of a run of the mill Facebook conspiracy theory post. So I was very pleasantly surprised when I saw reasonable ideas being thrown around here.
Now, my two cents on this broad topic, is that a lot about what people know in politics, also has to do with what they think is the "crux" of politics itself, the central motor behind political change. To me, that would be material value; in other words, class struggle. Not singlehandedly, but very significantly so, and in a way that is often overlooked. It's hard to trust a system that can so easily be corrupted or influenced by money, at the same time that extremely wealthy and influential individuals exist.
I usually avoid the term "socialism" because it's so broad, and different people have very different ideas of what it entails. So what do I believe in? I believe that people should own their means of production. Not those richer than them (since that'll only lead to them getting richer); and definitely not the state (since that will only lead to centralization of power, and then subjugation, and then yet another Stalin or Mao). Where they can't own their companies, workers should unionize, so they are able to have some bargaining power to negotiate with their employers; more specifically, the ability to strike when standards of basic decency are not met. If you understand what I mean, then I will take the liberty to call myself a libertarian socialist.
That said, I'm very much pragmatic in how I think about reality and politics and the world around us. Not ideologically driven. To me, everyone has an ideology, even when they don't realize it, be it an entrepeneurial mindset, or concerns of social equity, or what have you. Capitalism itself is an ideology, it's just what we're used to and acclimatized to.
Ideology is best when it serves to help inform your decisions, not your worldview; it should serve as an useful magnifying glass to understand our reality, but not the thing being observed to draw conclusions from. That is another reason I don't like talking about my positions; it makes me sound dogmatic, when I'm not. For one, I'm definitely not a tankie.
Either way, I think the main concern right now is to curb fascism and the rise of its threats towards democratic institutions. It is happening here in Brazil (with Bolsonaro) just as it is in the US, or in Italy (with Meloni). As I understand it, it is one of the two currents that have recently risen in reaction to the onset and development of the economical crisis deriving from neoliberal (unregulated) economics.
I'm glad to be able to have this kind of conversation politely, it is important for the future of our society. I wish you a good evening.
Thanks so much for the kind words and your well thought out response @wallabra! :-) I really appreciate it.
I agree with most you're saying, except that I have no qualms calling myself a Marxist or socialist. However broadly those terms are interpreted, any move in their direction is beneficial. Libertarianism and anarchism both are rooted in the leftist and Marxist movements, so I have no trouble with "libertarian socialist", as long as the ownership you're speaking of is collective (democratic) ownership; private ownership is exactly capitalism's greatest fault, and is exactly what socialism rejects. That's my two cents in any case :-)
Yes, the topic of the various strains of socialism is fascinating, like a visit to the zoo. There are a lot of good ideas, and bad ideas, and everything inbetween, and as political social beings endowed with an understanding of history, it is our duty to cherrypick.
Anarchism actually predates Marxism as a current in leftist thought, and libertarianism comes in various sizes and shapes. Libertarian socialism is socialism with less of an emphasis on centralism or the nationalization of the means of production. Anarchism and libertarian Marxism are two more radical strains of libertarian socialism, but broadly speaking, libertarian socialism doesn't even necessarily entail revolutionism.
Personally I like a gradualist approach, I believe a society is best maintained by people who are consonant with its foundational ideas and values, and therefore people's ways of thinking need to evolve in lockstep with society itself, or we'll stumble over ourselves and become too vulnerable to being co-opted by fascist elements, with historical examples like the Bolsheviks.
But yes, of course there is also the element of left unity, which is important.
I wonder what your thoughts on this matter are and what you think would be the best ways to tackle the issue of the corporatization of society. There's a lot of possible answers and I think we should try all of the ones we know work :)
I believe a society is best maintained by people who are consonant with its foundational ideas and values, and therefore people's ways of thinking need to evolve in lockstep with society itself...
I agree, and therefore I mostly identify as an incrementalist. However, for society to budge at all, I also believe the rhetoric needs to be honest, and therefore radical. And looking at history we see that power is never given away voluntarily, so the journey to the left has always been punctuated by direct action, protest, and, unfortunately, violence. I can only hope we can collectively find a better way...
Congratulations @zyx066! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s):
You distributed more than 120000 upvotes. Your next target is to reach 125000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the wordSTOP
Great stuff! I love how you take a moment to call out the alt-right on its stupidity and political ineptness. Your post's aesthetics are a bit weird, perhaps. Almost edgy. The thumbnail and subtitel are mildly reminiscent of a run of the mill Facebook conspiracy theory post. So I was very pleasantly surprised when I saw reasonable ideas being thrown around here.
Now, my two cents on this broad topic, is that a lot about what people know in politics, also has to do with what they think is the "crux" of politics itself, the central motor behind political change. To me, that would be material value; in other words, class struggle. Not singlehandedly, but very significantly so, and in a way that is often overlooked. It's hard to trust a system that can so easily be corrupted or influenced by money, at the same time that extremely wealthy and influential individuals exist.
I usually avoid the term "socialism" because it's so broad, and different people have very different ideas of what it entails. So what do I believe in? I believe that people should own their means of production. Not those richer than them (since that'll only lead to them getting richer); and definitely not the state (since that will only lead to centralization of power, and then subjugation, and then yet another Stalin or Mao). Where they can't own their companies, workers should unionize, so they are able to have some bargaining power to negotiate with their employers; more specifically, the ability to strike when standards of basic decency are not met. If you understand what I mean, then I will take the liberty to call myself a libertarian socialist.
That said, I'm very much pragmatic in how I think about reality and politics and the world around us. Not ideologically driven. To me, everyone has an ideology, even when they don't realize it, be it an entrepeneurial mindset, or concerns of social equity, or what have you. Capitalism itself is an ideology, it's just what we're used to and acclimatized to.
Ideology is best when it serves to help inform your decisions, not your worldview; it should serve as an useful magnifying glass to understand our reality, but not the thing being observed to draw conclusions from. That is another reason I don't like talking about my positions; it makes me sound dogmatic, when I'm not. For one, I'm definitely not a tankie.
Either way, I think the main concern right now is to curb fascism and the rise of its threats towards democratic institutions. It is happening here in Brazil (with Bolsonaro) just as it is in the US, or in Italy (with Meloni). As I understand it, it is one of the two currents that have recently risen in reaction to the onset and development of the economical crisis deriving from neoliberal (unregulated) economics.
I'm glad to be able to have this kind of conversation politely, it is important for the future of our society. I wish you a good evening.
Thanks so much for the kind words and your well thought out response @wallabra! :-) I really appreciate it.
I agree with most you're saying, except that I have no qualms calling myself a Marxist or socialist. However broadly those terms are interpreted, any move in their direction is beneficial. Libertarianism and anarchism both are rooted in the leftist and Marxist movements, so I have no trouble with "libertarian socialist", as long as the ownership you're speaking of is collective (democratic) ownership; private ownership is exactly capitalism's greatest fault, and is exactly what socialism rejects. That's my two cents in any case :-)
Hello, friend!
Yes, the topic of the various strains of socialism is fascinating, like a visit to the zoo. There are a lot of good ideas, and bad ideas, and everything inbetween, and as political social beings endowed with an understanding of history, it is our duty to cherrypick.
Anarchism actually predates Marxism as a current in leftist thought, and libertarianism comes in various sizes and shapes. Libertarian socialism is socialism with less of an emphasis on centralism or the nationalization of the means of production. Anarchism and libertarian Marxism are two more radical strains of libertarian socialism, but broadly speaking, libertarian socialism doesn't even necessarily entail revolutionism.
Personally I like a gradualist approach, I believe a society is best maintained by people who are consonant with its foundational ideas and values, and therefore people's ways of thinking need to evolve in lockstep with society itself, or we'll stumble over ourselves and become too vulnerable to being co-opted by fascist elements, with historical examples like the Bolsheviks.
But yes, of course there is also the element of left unity, which is important.
I wonder what your thoughts on this matter are and what you think would be the best ways to tackle the issue of the corporatization of society. There's a lot of possible answers and I think we should try all of the ones we know work :)
I agree, and therefore I mostly identify as an incrementalist. However, for society to budge at all, I also believe the rhetoric needs to be honest, and therefore radical. And looking at history we see that power is never given away voluntarily, so the journey to the left has always been punctuated by direct action, protest, and, unfortunately, violence. I can only hope we can collectively find a better way...
Congratulations @zyx066! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s):
Your next target is to reach 125000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Check out the last post from @hivebuzz: