this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
1209 points (99.6% liked)

World News

38969 readers
2402 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Plastic producers have known for more than 30 years that recycling is not an economically or technically feasible plastic waste management solution. That has not stopped them from promoting it, according to a new report.

“The companies lied,” said Richard Wiles, president of fossil-fuel accountability advocacy group the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI), which published the report. “It’s time to hold them accountable for the damage they’ve caused.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Good luck

Edit:

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism. Source

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So don't even try?

You know how ridiculous it looks to try to justify inaction, since nothing will ever affect change (per that stupid link of yours), so why bother?

You're so busy to try to win an Internet argument, and save face for being called out on something, that you post some kind of really dumb link on something so abstract that no one gives a crap about, instead of just taking a moment and thinking about "hey maybe if I made that phone call my local rep will see that their constituents are interested in the subject and will actually bring it up when they're in Washington".

You are part of the problem that you're bitching and moaning about here on Lemmy.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

No. You’re part of the problem. Liberals think they can create radical change in the capitalist system through voting and reforms, when that is empirically not the case.

All of Marx’s economic works, mainly The Capital, seek to show that it is not possible to solve the problems of capitalism through reforms, as Proudhon wanted. Source.

We are under threat from fascism because of liberalism.

The immediate point: those looking for salvation in electoral politics are unlikely to find it. Source.

I do not advocate inaction. I want people to educate themselves and organize. I don’t care about losing internet arguments.

Fine. You win. Now, read and learn of things that might help you better create change.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Liberals think they can create radical change in the capitalist system through voting and reforms,

You know, talking to your local house representative isn't a "liberal" thing to do, it's an American citizenry thing to do.

And I guarantee you, if enough of us did that, on a regular basis, so that those Representatives are fearful for their positions if they go against the will of their constituents, you would see actual change happen.

You won't see change if we just complain about things on an Internet forum.

By the way, that Cambridge paper you quoted, is from 2014. Politics has changed since then. And, that paper doesn't discuss at all about the issue of the citizenry being inactive and not forcing their will onto those they elect. It also mentions where citizenry through special interest groups like labor unions can affect change.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well, you’ve proven yourself. I’ll stop reading revolutionary theory and call my representative Monday.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Even Marxists who live in a democratic country could potentially benefit from speaking to their local elected representative. Beats waiting around for a revolution that will never come.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I’m old. I’ve written. Emailed. Called, and voted my entire life. The political landscape is not getting better. It’s getting worse.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

’m old. I’ve written. Emailed. Called, and voted my entire life. The political landscape is not getting better. It’s getting worse.

At least you can look at yourself in the mirror; you tried. The only thing any of us could be asked to do. Don't let cynicism ruin you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You seem to be a cruel optimist.

A relation of cruel optimism is a double-bind in which your attachment to an object sustains you in life at the same time as that object is actually a threat to your flourishing. So you can't say that there are objects that have the quality of cruelty or not cruelty, it's how you have the relationship to them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not really. If you go deeper, you’ll find that everyone is immoral.

If it is in our power to prevent something very bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything morally significant, we ought, morally, to do it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not really. If you go deeper, you’ll find that everyone is immoral.

I mean, we're straying far from the original conversation, so I'll just leave it with agree to disagree, and move on.

Take care.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And that is why nothing happens…

Take care.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

And that is why nothing happens…

Take care.

Well, trying to meet you in the middle of "everyone is immoral" is too much of a hard ask.

I thought we were having an honest and polite conversation, but you seem to go for that last Internet point win all of a sudden.

What was your expectation? What exactly are you advocating?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm asking you to use your own words, and not just link years old articles.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Enlightened Centrists will kill us all. Source

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Organizing can sometimes be as simple as "hey lets all call a senator to pressure them and lock up the phone lines and staff". The idea that strikes or revolutions are the only things that effect change is silly. Those just hurt the most but they are the hardest to organize as well.