this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
90 points (76.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
718 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
Being progressive for a liberal is not being a leftist, ie a Socialist. Biden has done very little to move that bar.
not being a socialist is typically a good thing ...
Being a Socialist is the bare minimum if you're a leftist, like a somewhat significant portion of Americans, and most people on Lemmy I believe.
This post is directed at leftists, so it makes sense that people are unhappy with Biden from the perspective of a leftist.
if a significant portion of americans were leftist, the democratic socialists of america would be way bigger.
the fact that biden has been one of the most pro worker, progressive presidents in recent history should be reason enough to vote for him
Oof, that's a lot of straight up garbage, no offense.
The DSA isn't the only leftist organization, and it's still large enough to have an impact on congress.
Biden being the most pro-worker president for a liberal isn't saying anything at all. Liberalism is inherently anti-worker, just not nearly as bad as fascism. Occasionally tossing workers a bone does not make Biden pro-worker overall.
The fact that leftists aren't satisfied with tepid liberal policies that still continue to entrench Capitalists does not make them right-wing trolls. Socialism is absolutely not horseshoe theory either, on the left end you have worker power and ownership of the Means of Production, and on the right end you have Capitalist ownership of the Means of Production.
This is the point I take most issue with, it's clear that you personally are a liberal, which is fine for you, but you're making absolutely terrible cases for why leftists should join you on the right and just be satisfied with the continued right wing status quo. If you want to convince leftists to hop over, the solution is certainly not to call everyone to the left of you a right wing troll.
Many liberals are anti-worker, but the political philosophy of liberalism is not inherently anti-worker. Liberal anti-capitalists like David Ellerman illustrate this using liberal principles of justice to argue for a universal inalienable right to workers' self-management and abolition of the employer-employee relationship @asklemmy
The political philosophy of liberalism is centered around the concept of private property and removing the ceiling for the individual to achieve. Anti-capitalists may espouse the ideals of individual liberty, but should not be labeled liberals.
The normative basis of private property, which capitalists claim to adhere to, is people's inalienable right to appropriate the positive and negative fruits of their labor. Capitalism routinely violates this principle in the employment contract. Satisfying the principles of private property would require that all firms be worker cooperatives. The principles of liberalism imply anti-capitalism. It is entirely compatible to be a liberal and an anti-capitalist @asklemmy
I disagree, you're ascribing values to structures that are agnostic towards those.
It is not liberal to construct a market of Worker co-ops, but it is absolutely in line with Market Socialism.
When I said capitalists there I meant liberal defenders of capitalism.
A market economy of worker coops has private property, so can't be socialist. Market socialism is a misnomer and unnecessarily associates with a label people already have preconceived notions about @asklemmy
A market economy of Worker co-ops has full worker ownership of the Means of Production. This is the basis of Socialism, so it's aptly named. It cannot be Capitalist, as it has no Capitalists. Calling it "private property" is technically correct but betrays the idea that it's Capitalistic.
Worker co-ops don't necessarily have full worker ownership of the means of production because a worker coop can lease means of production from a third party. It is not socialist. Nor do I mean to suggest it is capitalist. It can't be capitalism as it has no capitalists as you correctly point out. Since you recognize that it is technically correct to say a worker co-op market economy has private property, you recognize
Capitalism โ private property @asklemmy
So by your perspective, if the Workers co-ops cannot lease from a third party, would that be Socialist?
Capitalism does not equal private property, but at the same time liberalism is about Capitalism and individual ownership of property.
Perhaps, but there isn't a good reason to place such a restriction on worker co-ops. Worker co-ops shouldn't be forced to buy the entire thing when a segment of its services would do.
Liberals as a group tend to support capitalism. Liberalism as a political philosophy can have implications that claimed adherents don't endorse. After mapping out all the logical implications of liberal principles, it becomes clear that coherent liberalism is anti-capitalist @asklemmy