this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
143 points (93.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43970 readers
994 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is what I am talking about, actually. You're currently talking about what you want, without analysis of how to get there. That's why Marxism is incompatible with Social Democracy. Marxists don't believe you can simply vote that into existence in a system where Capitalists have.all of the power.
Lots of shoulds without discussing how to get there.
It's not really Marxist inspired, though. It erases all analysis of Capitalism, all philosophical aspects, and all of the revolutionary aspects of it. Social safery nets are good, but that's not necessarily borne from Marxism. Simply thinking a market economy can be good is already far off of Marxism.
I think this is ultimately born from a lack of engagement with Marx's works, really, though I could be wrong. What have you read from Marx?
I like the ideology of socialism where workers control the means of production but I think a revolution will always put the power in the hands of the few as a by-product. I agree with Marx on a lot of points, but I also disagree with him on others.
Rest assured that this is my own opinion and I seriously thought about it over a couple of years and came to my own conclusion. You can frame the conclusion simply as this:
Capitalism does a lot of bad, capitalism also does a lot of good (think cheaper food production and more investment into equipment for productivity). So there are two solutions. Remove capitalism or remove the bad. In my opinion removing capitalism is a surefire way to remove the bad but will also remove the good. Removing the bad from capitalism is a lot more complex and turns a sprint into a marathon but I think the end product will lead to a more equitable society that's genuinely controlled by the people.
That's my personal opinion.
Historically, Socialist revolutions have done dramatic shifts towards democratization of production.
Cheaper food production and investment into machinery is a core part of Marxism, achieved via central planning. Removing Capitalism doesn't remove these aspects.
Secondly, you don't mention at all how you will convince the ruling class to give you these concessions, it isn't a marathon, it's pushing a boulder up an infinite mountain.
Thirdly, you have not at all explained why Capitalism is more controlled by the people, the point of Capitalism is profit in the hands of the ones who hold the Capital. Democratically controlling production via Marxism makes far more sense.
It's fine to have a personal opinion, but Marxists are going to have similar criticisms of your opinions.