![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/31295d84-9480-46e6-a5a8-d491774797fc.jpeg)
![](https://startrek.website/pictrs/image/ccbc1d32-aa21-4d26-bb28-42e63bd83083.png)
I am using socialist interchangeably with communist here.
I am using socialist interchangeably with communist here.
Eh, to the extent that Hexbear meme-culture is both prevalent and constitutes as participation in bad faith, that would be true. This was not an example of this, which only serves to prove that the reply was actually in bad faith itself.
Thanks! The increasing difference between material conditions of the upper middle class / petit bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and the often ensuing split of the middle class into these two, is definitely a contention point that allows for quick fascist demagogues to capitalize on. I see that the loss of “old privileges” for the former fortunate middle class allows for admiration of some greater past, which plays well into the fascist textbook.
However, I do think the far right’s success within young males, for example, is a different symptom of the same condition. That young people whose futures are diminished by capitalist exploitation tend towards fascism as their solution, while fully educated about its past and its options, is what baffles me the most.
Maybe I am overlooking something and that is why I did not get your point originally nor that which I described above, but to me there seems to be a disconnect of logic that is exceptional, even when taking into consideration that we are talking about supporters of the far right.
Would you mind expanding on what you mean by material conditions and fascism in relation to old privileges (don’t know what you mean by the latter)?
Yeah, obviously they are the laughing stock here… You should pay more mind to content than affiliations. Even though dbzer0 is a cool admin with a cool community, your comment does not portray you as such.
That is understandable if you think only within the paradigm of some select countries dominating the rest, but that is perhaps the biggest obstacle to our gay space communist Star Trek future.
Caveat that I have not played the games, but taking the series at face value they are highly US-centric like most Hollywood productions. It makes no sense arguing on the basis of the series alone what they are going with in this regard, since all the action takes place in the US it is pretty much the scope of the universe, just like in many Americans minds. I tried to make a disjoint point, that was based on how I would interpret it with complete disregard to whatever is canon to the story as a whole, taking what is presented in the first season of the series at face value.
To put this into context with Star Trek, I also find it really boring and non-immersive whenever they hold 21st century America in special consideration. It is just such an obvious way to make a comparison to current state of affairs in one particular country, placating preferences of current pop culture, which is redundant anyway since all science fiction is a universal critique of the current state of affairs anywhere simply by showing a future alternative. A hypothetical sudden end to US hegemony is actually a valid way to make the current US affairs leading up to it special with respect to the future development of mankind, and not just a boring move for views.
Saw this episode for the first time two days ago and loved everything about it. Especially the inqusition of anti-union Ferengi, that is the FCA, captured the violence of capitalist oppression, both direct and threat thereof, beautifully.
I also liked the subtle points being made, like Odo being against the strike on basis of upholding law and order, even though this should contradict his moral compass in my opinion.
More like the dissolvement of US hegemony.
University rankings are stupid because in the best case they try to measure the quality of articles by number of citations and at worst they are just companies taking money for advertising.
Looking at the contents of their graduate courses is usually enough IMO to see whether they are serious or not.
The latter is an obvious smart deal to take. Just make sure to check yourself for cancer, not walking on a red light etc. according to the thing that kills you. Otherwise do the same. Odds are you would gain more time with your loved ones.
Fuck caring about legitimate issues. Get busy for capital gainz and do not worry about the exploitation of people like yourself, ya pleb.
I would just like to digress by pointing out that I found your discussion interesting and that .world defederating .ml would kill potential future ones like it. It also seems to me that rejecting ML impulses, say by disassociating the .ml and .world users, would not contribute to organising society in a way that would allow for the revolution you speak of.
MLs do not go away by ignoring them. One of their main tenets, which they are to be admired for, is precisely their obstinancy to making themselves heard. If I understood you correctly as a proponent of a solution that is yet to be evolved, why reject the input of MLs? I am personally curious about learning more about anarchism, that is if the theory is not so weak it would but all be destroyed by the breath of a ML.
I had to do a double take because this sentiment is prevalent throughout lemmy.world and other instances.
Yeah… Still, considering only my self interest I am really glad I am living in a social democracy opposed to many of the other hellscapes forged by capitalism.
Social democracy gets some things right, for all its faults.
The division on whether social democracy is a socialist movement or not pretty much coincides with the division between reform and revolution as means to attain socialism.
In 1995, Dylan described his reaction to hearing Hendrix’s version: “It overwhelmed me, really. He had such talent, he could find things inside a song and vigorously develop them. He found things that other people wouldn’t think of finding in there. He probably improved upon it by the spaces he was using. I took license with the song from his version, actually, and continue to do it to this day.”
18 days for this comeback was worse.
The first claim is just straight plain old racism, while the second reeks of confused lib. Either way, calling someone a slave in this context is almost certainly meant as an insult to the political organisation of the state and not to its people. This distinction is important with respect to moderation.
I consider the proletariat of capitalist societies to be slaves by definition. Thus if I were convinced that the PRC was capitalist, I could stand behind this sentiment.