sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 year ago

That's not entirely true. If we cut off carbon emissions right now, you'll still get the runaway train that is global warming, yes, but it will end sooner or will have a lesser peak temperature increase.

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 year ago

It's not really propaganda, it's just deflection. Call out corporations for contributing the most to the climate catastrophe, and they/the media/losers on social media immediately go "oh well what have you done personally to stop it" or "well you use their product means you're part of the problem" or "you're not recycling", deflecting the blame from corporations to individuals.

As long as these people are in power, nothing is going to change, only half assed unhelpful compromises.

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 15 points 1 year ago

Speaking from personal experience, see you on your old distro in a couple of days!

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 year ago

Just works is definitely something Linux should strive for, but at least in my experience and in experience of my friends, "just works" has always been a poor experience.

What I'm talking about is how you install a just works distro like mint or garuda, and then some package refuses to work or maybe hardware such as a sound card or multi monitor setup, so you gotta go troubleshooting, which isn't very "just works". What's worse is that some of the issues aren't talked about/documented, so you pretty much have to rely on making a post and wait for potentially hours for a response to get help. It's also very hard to troubleshoot the system by yourself if you don't have experience, as you don't really know what's running under the hood as in what came prepackaged by the distro.

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 3 points 1 year ago

I didn't mean it like that. My comment was about how a lot of billionaires, governments and politicians seem to believe that capitalism is the only system that can ever exist in a civilized society, and how there can be no alternative (some prominent influential figures that held this belief or something similar were/are Larry Kudlow, Margaret Thatcher, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Ronald Reagan).

There's also the fact about how in the 20th and 21st century there was a significant effort to undermine any alternative ideologies in the western liberal democratic world. The various anti-red campaigns by the US, Thatcherism that destroyed the significance of unions in order to completely remove any possibility of a revolution (and turn workers into free-market commodities), there was also this very recent event in 2021 where during Rosa Luxemburg peaceful memorial event in Germany, police suddenly came up to disrupt it, presenting false motives.

There might be something better, a society or a system that serves the many instead of the few, but such non-capitalist system would go against the interests of the rich and the ruling elite, so there's an active heavy pushback against it. Even when it comes to politics, the political left is definitely outnumbered at least in my country rather than political parties that lean to the center or the right, which are the parties that keep the status quo or even strengthen the elites further.

I'm approaching this from a leftist point of view, and my arguments are probably not perfect, but at least that's how I see it. Capitalism is definitely better for people than Monarchy/Aristocracy, but it could definitely be much better for the people.

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 29 points 1 year ago

Because current US politics and justice system are a sham that only serves the rich.

How come there are still people who get the death penalty but later get found to be innocent, while when it comes to an ex-politician, they gotta drag the process out for years and years to find every single detail?

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 53 points 1 year ago

The notion that capitalism is the end-all be-all of how society functions/works.

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 year ago

I highly doubt that owners of large companies actually do a lot of work, even for massive organizations. The corporate web is highly complex, and it's kind of impossible for outsiders to know how everything works internally, but judging from how many management positions there are, and seeing how much free time they have judging from their media presence and them having enough time to go to space (which requires training might I add), it's hard for, at least me, to see how they do much of anything besides speaking in events, owning the means of production and occasionally using their money to expand the company.

Again, it's hard to tell with these companies being secretive and this large, and maybe the owners do a lot more work than I'm giving them credit for. But from the various stories and their media appearances, I have my doubts.

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I shamelessly use calculator.net instead of installing a calculator on my system lmao

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 4 points 1 year ago

If the state is controlled by unsavory people, then you probably have bigger issues at hand than them controlling the housing.

If the government is extremely authoritarian where being a political dissident puts you at risk of persecution, then you wouldn't be able to stay at your home regardless. If the government is extremely corrupt and hand out the best apartments to their inner circle while leaving everything else to others, then it would still be an improvement to the current system, at least in my eyes.

Point is, there are far more effective ways to mess with people you don't like if you're a state controlled by unsavory people. That being said, a country has an interest in having a population as without it, there's no country, no production of food and other things - going full evil and just committing genocide or mass homelessness would not make any sense.

Meanwhile, the interest of private land/property owners who hoard/acquire land/property with the intent to either rent or sell is to make as much money as possible, they don't particularly care if it gives someone in need a roof over the head as long as they're making money.

Also, with the housing crises around the whole world, the amount of vacant houses that would alleviate or outright solve those crises, and many types of fraud going around the world when it comes to building new housing, it's safe to say that the current housing system is controlled by unsavory individuals. In the real world, not in a hypothetical scenario.

Apologies for the long reply.

[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 26 points 1 year ago

Houses and similar private property should be owned by the state and be given out to those in need for free, rather than owned by private individuals to sell/rent and make a profit. It's literally a basic human need that's becoming less and less accessible due to greed (constantly rising prices and scams landlords might try to pull), and it's very easy to just lose one if you're unfortunate enough to be unemployed for a longer period of time.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

Commiunism

joined 1 year ago