this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
90 points (76.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
758 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
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
Leftism isn't about winning, that's the part you're missing. If you're just doing what you can to win than you're no different to and will fall for the same things as a fascist. I remember hearing "leftists are addicted to losing" and what makes that quote especially good is that it came from a guy who later outed themselves as being a fascist infiltrator once they no longer needed to convince people to vote Democrat.
Marxists don't care about winning. That's idealism. What we want is an improving of material conditions for the working class.
What he meant is that people are unhappy when he asks about non-voters, and also when he asks about voters. He can't win [the approval of people on Lemmy]. Also, not all leftists are marxists.
If you can be a "leftist" without being at least some branch of marxism, than the term has lost all its meaning. I mean you don't have to like the guy (he has many flaws) to realize the importance his work had on kickstarting the anticapitalist movement that started the left.
I self identify as a leftist but I don't think I'm ready to call myself a marxist. Maybe one day that will change, maybe not. Regardless of what definitions you may be about to link for me, what I think usually separates me from those I view as liberals is that they tend not to see corporate greed as a problem, or not as a pervasive problem.
The problem with corporation isn't the "greed," becuase that aspect is unsolvable. It's that their current structure exists to exploit everything possible to benefit a very small number of people and they all act in cohort without coordination. A virtuous corporation cannot exist.
I'm going to keep calling this greed.
Call it Capitalism. It's a systemic issue, not a lack of individual morals.