Generally, social justice is at best, a distraction from real issues, albeit with very good intentions.
(We talk about human dignity, representation in film etc but not say, the fact most of our stuff is made by children who occasionally burn to death making it. If I were one of the billionaires running things, I would be overjoyed that people were so distracted about what a comedian said versus how our entire economic model is structured.)
The lack of justice is exactly how the elite class gets the lower groups to fight each other. The thought of a unified working class would keep up every banker at night if it weren’t for apathetic privileged class claiming that social justice isn’t that important.
The thing is you can't provide "justice" to all. A society will always have conflicting beliefs and some things just aren't worth fight for. Like when people were trying to make Latinx a thing. And like someone else posted not all immigrants are going to agree with a minority movement just because they are a minority.
The thought of a unified working class would keep up every banker at night if it weren’t for apathetic privileged class claiming that social justice isn’t that important.
I think it depends on your definition of social justice. A real social justice, in my mind, would be concerned about the kids who die mining the cobalt for our phones rather than whether we should be saying latinx.
No banker or elite is scared because we now say policeperson instead of policeman.
A real social justice, in my mind, would be concerned about the kids who die mining the cobalt for our phones rather than whether we should be saying latinx.
With that criteria, nobody should do anything about anything until world hunger is eliminated.
Except people don’t do more than one thing. And the frustrating part is that the very issues that depend on nothing more than simple cultural views/coolness are the ones we are ignoring.
Imagine wearing slave made clothes was as uncool as wearing a shirt with the N word or something. Companies would respond like lightning and the problem would be well underway to being solved.
Instead, we whine about the Oscars or get angry about a part of Dave Chappelle’s special. And I get it, it is MUCH easier to complain about things that necessitate zero change or effort on our part (besides complaining on twitter or agreeing with our friends about how evil whatever is.) It just annoys the hell out of me.
This is the whole point of it though, you’re saying that other people should put up with being treated badly because you don’t care about them - that’s selfish but beyond that it’s very short sighted, you think you’re going to get everyone to fight to make a better society when you can’t even do the smallest thing to make people feel included?
It’s literally no effort to say police officer rather than police man, spokesperson is again no effort at all to say compared to spokesman - it’s more accurate and more inclusive, refusing makes no sense. The only reason you’d refuse is if you don’t want to acknowledge the reality that women also do those jobs, would you want to fight alongside someone who resents your existence? Who thinks you shouldn’t have the same rights and dignity as them? That’s shown even the smallest thing is too much for you to care about and that your brave new world you’re fighting for will exclude and denigrate you? Why should you?
I think you misunderstand the point I’m making.It’s not that saying police officer in of itself is a bad thing, it’s that the majority of social justice is about smaller issues like that rather than actual serious things. Those smaller, albeit well intentioned issues wouldn’t be harmful in of themselves but they drown out or take the place of more serious, meaningful issues. And more irritatingly, make people feel lile they are “fighting” for real change when we’re arguing about semantics instead of the children who are maimed to support our cushy lifestyles.
Another way to think about it, it is sort of like a slave owner chiding someone for using the N word in the 1700s; that’s very enlightened but surely the slaves are the more pressing issue!
You really think we’re going to tackle large systematic problems when we can’t even agree not to use language that excludes half the population? The tiniest attempt at improving society is met by endless pushback, but sure let’s play your game - give me an ordered list of the first five things we should work on
You really think we’re going to tackle large systematic problems
I think we should at least try for real issues, like children burning to death, vs nagging people about slightly better language.
I don’t have an ordered list but like I said earlier, the women and children who die making our stuff is exactly the type of issue for which modern social justice is ideally placed. It would take nothing more than making slave made clothes uncool and then people’s buying habits change and then companies would follow for thay whole “profit” thing.
Make wearing slave made stuff as uncool as saying f****t and the rest follows.
Otherwise, you’re just patting each other on the back on twitter about being morally superior while not changing or doing anything.
Policing language is the junk food of social justice, it feels like real food and is fine in some quantities but the real harm is that it takes the place of real, nutritious/meaningful food/social change.
Otherwise, you’re just patting each other on the back on twitter about being morally superior while not changing or doing anything.
Isn’t this exactly what you are doing? You are debating that there are more important things so it isn’t important to think of the ‘little stuff’. So, instead of using inclusive language, which would be ‘changing or doing anything’, you are arguing there is a more morally superior thing to focus on.
But really, my social justice isn’t usually online. Right now, this is me trying to contribute to Lemmy while I poop, with honest opinions.
And I do believe there is something absolutely more worthwhile that we should be focusing on instead of the latest silly social justice trend (latinx anyone?) And that is the children who are maimed and burn to death making our stuff. I live my life as best I can to avoid that and support ethical businesses, I encourage my friends to do the same and I think if half the energy that people spend on twitter being outraged about relatively meaningless shit (I am hard pressed to believe that Chappelle’s jokes are somehow worse than a 6 year old burning to death) that things would be a lot better.
I don’t feel morally superior so much as saddened that all those good intentions and energy are channeled to relatively meaningless battles instead of making real, tangible change that is entirely within our capability.
I’ve wondered about that a lot. I think it’s more a natural consequence of social media algorithms. Surely you are more likely to reteeet/like/post something that doesn’t imply you yourself are, with your daily choices, supporting an abhorrent structure.
I was going to reserve dinner at a place for our 7th anniversary of our marriage. My phone ran out of battery, so she told me to use hers.
While I was using it she received a message saying “tomorrow again? 😏”. Curiosity killed me, I opened the message because, as far as I knew, she stayed home while I was working the day before.
To my surprise, the guy that texted her sent her a video of her on all fours with 2 men cuming on her. Needless to say, there was no 7th anniversary dinner. This was also years ago so I got over it.
I could have said “she cheated on me” and leave it at that but I feel like the whole story is spicier.
Something similar happened to me with my first wife … I read an email meant for her that was quite descriptive, not to mention x rated, and it left me pretty devastated. I was in a very dark place after that. But now, many years later, I’m very happily married to a partner who is perfect for me in every way. My advice to everyone who goes through this is hang in there, it hurts like hell but things will get better and one day you’ll look back and realize it was better you found out and got out when you did.
That’s what I said to her… Hell, it would have been a blessing for me if she was doing things with other people sometimes.
I was feeling horrible for her because I have a terrible case of arthritis and I can’t do stuff like a normal person, sometimes I couldn’t even move for weeks or spend time at the hospital, so sex was almost impossible. We were doing it once every 4 months, maybe more.
The first thing I told her was “Look, if you’re gonna do something with someone else, at least let me know first, I can understand due to the conditions so there’s no problem if you really need it, just please tell me first”.
First thing she did was not tell me, and that is what messed me up, the stupid lie.
I kind of thought she was a bit distant, but not cheating, but at that time I was dealing with a terrible case of arthritis at that time, so between going to the hospital and spending days, sometimes weeks in bed without being able to move I was not really thinking about it.
It’s a left-leaning, progressive state. Everyone who talks shit about this state in anything other than the cost of living generally doesn’t have an answer because their actual reason for disliking the state is that it’s not a republican state.
I’ve worked a job that required using an app on my phone, and in order to install that app I had to give ROOT ACCESS and full remote control to the IT department and was subject to the same monitoring as when using a company desk or laptop. I just grabbed an older phone I had lying around and used that for work because I wasn’t about to give complete remote access to the phone I actually used every day.
Wait, your job required root access to your personal cell phone phone at all times? So if you were at home off the clock you were still restricted on your personal phone as to what websites you could view?
It’s also a legal issue. If something happens legally that’s work related and your phone becomes part of the discovery process someone would sift through your personal data
It’s ridiculous how we call ourselves the land of the free unless you want to bike to work, drive a small car, have privacy or do anything different/differently from everyone else is not ok here
If you are android, there is an app called Shelter that lets you create customized contained work profile inside which apps can be killed completely until you enable work profile again. This would usually be enabled by certain official app by your employer’s IT policy, such as MS’s Company Policy, so you don’t normally have control over what app to put in the profile, but with Shelter you can pick and choose any app into the work profile freely. If you have other apps you don’t trust, you can also use it to contain them too
Fuck that. Our company gives us phones because they know they’re secure. And we don’t use them for anything but work related apps. I still make all my phone calls from my personal or office phone
I say, “We,” but that’s not entirely true. There are a couple of jackasses that do everything on them, but I assume the company can see it of they want to. So, fuck that
I worked for a small earmold company that made hearing aids and plugs. The PC I used had zero security. I decked it out with every possible imaginable tool to make my job easier, even had it where I could vpn in and do work from home, and while I didn’t utilize this feature, the ceo’s son did after I told him about it for a few weeks after I quit.
Our HR manager constantly asked for email counts each day, so I automated a spreadsheet for her. I set a webcam up in an office with a laser engraver so I knew when the staff would put molds down for engraving without being in the room. I had syncthing cloning directories and a virtual desktop. I’d often model blender models on lunch and sync them back to my nas. Sometimes I’d make custom things for the company, then 3D print them and bring them in the next day.
I had waaaasay too much power, though. I could go pick through the company samba server, look at anything, potentially delete everything. They kept backups on dated copies made on external drives and deleted everything four years old.
My work laptop just got replaced, and what’s great is the dock that came with it. It only connects to my laptop thru a USB C. So. Now I unhook my laptop, and plug my phone into it, which uses Dex. It’s like Samsung’s own desktop OS. And I can use my big screens and keyboard and mouse
I also make sure my phone isn’t using the network cable plugged into it and only use my own internet. I don’t think it’d let me anyways
Not really. It’s okay for some just casual internet browsing and a few apps that are made for it, and I think you can use Office on it, but I’ve only used it to entertain myself at work. If you had access to a laptop or PC, you can plug a USB cable into any of the flagship Samsung phones and test it out.
Itd be nice if more people used it though, so itd get more support
If you’re familiar with Linux at all, there are some versions you can put on a rooted Android phone, and use it like a Linux PC. I never tried it, but I know it was a thing about 10 years ago, and I’m sure it’s still being worked on
I’m visiting other companies for work every now and then.
If they are in a fancy new steel-and-concrete office building with open space offices, chances are that cell reception is very bad. I once was in an office where I’m certain they had installed cell blockers on the toilets.
You know, it’s surprisingly vague even in the official documentation.
Let’s test it out. Create a post on your instance, and then make a comment on that post, and I’ll go report them both as “testing” and we’ll see if you get notified.
I have no idea what reporting does. Not even if it is sent. I tried reporting some nudity content in a community, but it was broken en 2 apps, and took a very long time from the browser…
Ohhhh… Well that might be an issue with your specific instance being unresponsive. The reports I just did, however, worked pretty much how you would expect, so it’s not likely to be a lemmy-ui or backend bug.
I got them, so looks like it does work as expected, my instance admin must just also get my reports. Kinda weird but if they go to the right place as well I’m not too concerned.
Edit: strikethrough is working on my end in the connect app.
You know, it’s surprisingly vague even in the official documentation.
You just described literally all of Lemmy’s documentation.
I had to read the source code for Lemmy to find out what API endpoint to hit, how it worked, and what to expect on return for a script that I was writing. You need to do that for some documented API endpoints as well. Calling it “vague” is a nice way to put it.
I’ve switched to purely gesture navigation and never looked back. Wouldn’t surprise me if they’d remove 2 button too eventually.
Never understood 2 button navigation, it’s just a lot of wasted space for just 2 buttons. Gimme 3-4-5 buttons to do useful stuff if you’re gonna use the space.
Dedicated buttons for copy, paste, and undo would be amazing. I don’t think Android has good support for undo though, it would be cool to undo accidental swipes like when you accidentally swipe away a notification, or if you accidentally tap the space around a dialog box and it disappears
Agreed! I’ve thought this for a while. It’s crazy that iPhone still doesn’t have a back button, and it blows me away that neither iOS nor Android have undo or redo.
Ios kinda does have undo via a shake but you could also say it’s not discoverable, slow and awkward. No idea if Android has anything system and not app-lvl though.
I felt the same. 3 button do the job quicker (a single tap to get what you want) but occupy a part of the screen. Gesture makes you do more but give you back the screen estate. 2 button seems to combine the downside without offering anything advantageous.
I also find the back gesture to be surprisingly convenient. It’s easier to reach, in part because you can reach it from anywhere on either side of the screen. And the gestures from the bottom lets you go back/forward an app, home and also all of the recent apps. And also assistant or an app of your choice by swiping from the bottom corners.
Plus, on top of that, on LineageOS you can also bind a custom action for a second stage for the back gesture if you swipe it further away, like kill app or go back to the previous app. And left/right side from the top for notifications/quick settings, and swipe at the top for brightness.
Zero pixels used for what, 9 different actions? It’s pretty sweet!
Yeah it’s small, but a few phones got burn in from it (my cousin’s LG V30 is one example). Personally I use 3 button on a LCD screen so that’s not a problem for me.
I don’t feel like testing it out on my own device, since haven’t had one that hasn’t gotten burn in yet. Especially with how expensive phones have gotten that I’ll be using it beyond the usual two year upgrade path.
Content that you cannot acquire by any “lawful” means.
Content that you already own a copy of (Yes, this includes “only” having a “license” to it; you own what you own).
Content that is outrageously priced, and/or from large companies where the people who worked on the product will receive nothing from sold copies. (EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, etc)
Third category also contains works so old that only the people hoarding rights to said works profit from giving out licenses to them bc they never worked on them.
Most TV shows in foreign countries, and a billion movies are like this. Since they refuse to take my money, I can’t feel guilty for getting it for free.
Something tells me you’re keylogged if you keep cancelling, ordering new ones and getting pwned within days of the new card arriving. Format your computers. Use more open source tools whose code you can audit. Firefox instead of Chrome, no sketchy extensions like Honey and cash back stuff. If you pirate stuff, try to do it from verified sources.
I cannot agree with this more. It maybe a PITA to have to enter each time but the peace of mind is worth it. Also, if you use a password Manger, which you you should be, do not keep the cars stored in there either.
If my capital one card is stolen? Odds are, capital one will cancel and re-issue the card before I even notice. Otherwise, I notice it when I skim my transactions while paying my bill. And with a credit card? Absolute worse case scenario, I have a lower limit for a few days while they resolve the fraud. More often they just instantly pretend it never happened and deal with it themselves.
Contrast that with debit cards where you potentially have the equivalent of a hold on your bank account.
I have zero concerns over having my credit card stored in firefox because it really barely affects me if it is stolen. Which is the way to go.
Really, radio communication is about creating and transmitting those radio waves. Sign language relies on reflected light waves so it’s actually a form of RADAR 😀
That’s just what the acronym means, it doesn’t describes the actual process. I don’t think there is a single RADAR that doesn’t have a transmitter. At that point it would just be a… radio.
Fair enough, though I would argue that’s a very specific subtype of radar and anyone saying “radar” refers to the type that is used in 99.999% of the cases.
It’s been like a week since the most recent migration happened, we can’t just expect this to blow over immediately when like 90% here came from reddit just 7 days ago
I’m a doctor. My job exists because nature hates you, and we can do better.
I have to hold my tongue when patients tell me they don’t want vaccines because they “want to do it naturally.” Fuck nature. Nature made polio, and polio paralyzes children. Nature can kiss my ass.
Yep, tool use evolved pretty early in animals (some insects and fish can use tools,) though of course humans have gone a step further and use tools to make other, better tools.
The smallpox vaccine was developed in 1796, nearly a century before the first phone and a good 20 years before the first bicycles. The tech in COVID-19 vaccines was discovered 20 years before the first iPhone, but people act like it was invented yesterday.
Fascism is simply the conclusion of capitalism. Antifa is a bunch of socialists because socialism is the only cure. Anticomm and Fascism have so much overlap as movements because they’re the same movement. Even in the historical context of the first rise of fascism, who took the reins of power was people promising the capital holders they’d protect them from those scary laborers. And do you know what we don’t talk about enough in America? We don’t talk enough about why fascism didn’t take hold here. Its because in the 1920s the capital holders had seen what would happen in America if they tried to do a fascism: the coal miners rose up in violent revolt. We had what legitimately qualified as a civil war in West Virginia with the labor movement. It’s one of only two times american citizens on home soil have been bombed by an air force.
My concern is this: we don’t have enough people in this country right now who love their brethren enough to stand against fascism. I ask everyone to do this: look at the Black Lives Matter movement. Realize what the African American communities right next to you are doing to resist the police brutality they experience, the fascism they are already experiencing and resisting. Join them. Link arms with them. The reality is the antifascist movement in America is nothing new. How we prevent fascism from rising is we make sure the violent weirdos know we are many and they are few. Make sure they know they don’t have the man power to take over
Even checked Capitalism results in fascism, as Capitalism is entirely unsustainable and eventually results in the crisis that enables the rise of fascism.
Maybe so. Maybe capitalism can never remain checked because the temptation to acquire more wealth will always end up winning. You’d like to think that people are better than that, buuuuut…
I mean we do have a pretty good indication of a quite large impending factor which may cause a lot of them to collapse in the coming years, and which could collectively be attributed to them pretty well, especially within the last 50 years.
That is an interesting argument, but where is the proof? Economics is a very murky “science” as it is, a broad statement such as “capitalism is inherently unstable” needs some healthy data backing it up.
The same argument could be made about communism, as an economic system it doesn’t have the best track record.
Socialism seems to have a pretty good track record. But even in socialism there are issues, especially around ensuring a steady supply of kids coming through, once population starts falling the cracks start appearing.
That is an interesting argument, but where is the proof? Economics is a very murky “science” as it is, a broad statement such as “capitalism is inherently unstable” needs some healthy data backing it up.
Marx makes his case for it in Capital, specifically Volume 3, Chapter 13-15, though it’s easier to digest Wage Labor and Capital and Value, Price and Profit. Essentially, competition forces prices lower, and automation and increased production lower the price floor. Automation is pursued because it temporarily allows you to outcompete, until other firms can produce at the same price, forcing prices to match at a new floor. This continues. It’s more like gravity than an invisible hand, there do exist ways to push back against it, but the overall trend is negative, as the Rate of Profit falls to 0.
The same argument could be made about communism, as an economic system it doesn’t have the best track record.
It can’t, because Communism abolishes this system. Communism has a good track record when properly put into historical context and is definitely the correct goal to pursue.
Socialism seems to have a pretty good track record. But even in socialism there are issues, especially around ensuring a steady supply of kids coming through, once population starts falling the cracks start appearing.
Socialism is just the precursor to Communism. The USSR, Cuba, PRC, Vietnam, Laos, etc. are/were all Socialist, building towards Communism, I don’t see why you say Communism has a bad track record but Socialism has a good track record, that seems contradictory. Further still, I don’t see what birth rates have to do with anything.
I’d say that Marxism at least is fatally flawed. The idea that you start a Communist society by gathering all power to a central council is the issue. Once power is obtained it’s never willingly dispersed. This has been the fate of existing all communist governments
This is a fundamental and critical misunderstanding of what Communism is, and what Marx refers to as a State. Marx makes himself clear in Critique of the Gotha Programme, but the State for Marx isn’t just “government.” Marx was vehemontly anti-Anarchist, not out of principle disagreements, but on a practical and rational basis.
For Marx, the State is the element of government by which class society sustains and protects itself. Ie, private property rights, and the police that protect it. Communism would have a government, its own police, and its own structures and administration through central planning. The State whithering away, as Marx puts it, is the slow lack of retaining the former elements of class society. For example, we no longer have Streetlamp Lighters, as streetlamps are electric now. This wasn’t because they were targeted and eliminated, but simply fell out of favor with the progression of society.
Once power is obtained it’s never willingly dispersed. This has been the fate of existing all communist governments
This right here is the crux of your misunderstanding. Carrying over from the whithering away elaboration from my last paragraph, the government is not supposed to intentionally collapse itself, it’s supposed to remain a democratic worker government, and continue to be built up over time.
Different AES states have seen their own issues, but none of them have been due to “not willingly giving up power,” which is a fundamental misconception of how these AES States function, or what the Marxist path to Communism truly is.
Believing Marxism to be “fatally flawed” because you completely misunderstood his works to the foundational level is silly though, right? Marxism isn’t literary fiction or anything, where you can apply Death of the Author and write about your own personal meaning from the text, Marx was very clear both in writing and in speeches, and Marxists have studied and built on his original body of work.
You don’t have to take it from me alone, Marxism is extremely thoroughly documented and understood, flexible, adaptable, and widely discussed.
What was the point of your original comment? Just to take a dig at what other people were discussing and then dip when I tried to have a productive discussion with you?
I just mean that I don’t think they were a good faith interlocutor. Probably if I were to put a specific explanation on it, I’d say that they are probably tired of having the same argument over and over again and being corrected repetitively, to the point where they’re not genuinely engaging anymore, I’ve seen that a lot. Especially with how quickly they backed out but also still left a comment. I dunno if that level of bad faith would be considered trolling in the strictest sense, but I would probably still classify it as such.
Sometimes you make a comment about something that seems interesting and then realise you’ve wandered into a enclypoedia convention and have bitten off more than you have the head space to deal with. I probably should have said that instead of what I did say. My apologies
I did try to be thorough, but I guess I overexplained and ended up alienating you, my bad. I do hope you got something from it, I try to clear up misconceptions about Marxism when I see them because he is very misunderstood, especially on instances like Lemmy.world.
Don’t apologise. Totally my fault - I was being a dick. I’ve been on the other side of this kind of interaction with someone doubling down after being called out on being a jerk. I should do better. Thanks for your response
You should never be “happy” with your interpretation. You should always be willing to learn, refine and adjust your interpretation to changing conditions.
What does whither away are things like Private Property Rights and other elements by which Capitalist society maintains itself.
The “whithering away of the State” is one of the most commonly taken out of context aspects of Marxism, most people associate the State with all aspects of Government. Marx does not make that same association, and used the word State as shorthand for the aforementioned Capitalist elements of government.
This is why there’s a big difference between Anarchism and Marxism. Anarchists seek horizontal organization, and Marxists are fine with central planning and endorse it.
What do you mean by contemporary? The theory hasn’t really stagnated, Marxism has grown over time. There are AES states that have Marxism as the core model, but each are in different positions on the global sphere.
While I appreciate that Marx made a case, this is not data or evidence. It seems intuitively true, but that doesn’t really move you closer to real proof.
Essentially, competition forces prices lower, and automation and increased production lower the price floor. Automation is pursued because it temporarily allows you to outcompete, until other firms can produce at the same price, forcing prices to match at a new floor. This continues.
I’m not sure if you are trying to imply automation is a good or bad thing. Looking through history, the industrial revolution was bad for the workers of the time, but in the long run massively improved the living standards of everyone. Automation is a net good in my opinion. Competition is simply an accelerator, this is not really tied to the economic system being used. In capitalist or communist systems, firms that are protected from competition (by what ever means) do not innovate as fast or as effectively (see Intel as a great example of this).
Socialism is just the precursor to Communism.
While this can be true, it is not necessarily true.
I don’t see what birth rates have to do with anything.
As your population ages, the costs to care for them raise at an increasing rate. If you don’t have enough new workers to stabilize the economic base, the burden that an aging population places on the younger generation grows until it becomes untenable.
While I appreciate that Marx made a case, this is not data or evidence. It seems intuitively true, but that doesn’t really move you closer to real proof.
What would count as real proof, if not prices falling due to competition?
I’m not sure if you are trying to imply automation is a good or bad thing. Looking through history, the industrial revolution was bad for the workers of the time, but in the long run massively improved the living standards of everyone. Automation is a net good in my opinion. Competition is simply an accelerator, this is not really tied to the economic system being used. In capitalist or communist systems, firms that are protected from competition (by what ever means) do not innovate as fast or as effectively (see Intel as a great example of this).
I’m not arguing whether automation is “good or bad,” I am strictly speaking about the inherent unsustainability of Capitalism. Automation is good, but in Capitalism is used to purely benefit Capitalists, as wages stagnate with respect to ever-climbing productivity.
While this can be true, it is not necessarily true.
Why would it not be true? This still doesn’t explain why you stated Communism to have a poor track record, no AES state has yet made it to Communism, as Communism must be achieved globally.
As your population ages, the costs to care for them raise at an increasing rate. If you don’t have enough new workers to stabilize the economic base, the burden that an aging population places on the younger generation grows until it becomes untenable.
Again, this has nothing to do with Socialism or Communism. It seems to be referring to welfare for elderly people, which exists in all systems.
What would count as real proof, if not prices falling due to competition?
That is the problem I was referring to in my original post, “economics is a very murky science”, I come from an engineering and physical sciences point of view. Good economic data is hard to come by, it is always contaminated with chaotic factors that cannot be controlled for. “Proof” may not be possible in economic science.
Why would it not be true?
Because from a logical point of view, there is no necessity to go from socialism to communism. A country could easily decide that socialism is where they wan to stay. When something is necessarily true, not only does it always happen it must happen. That is the point I was trying to make, there is nothing fundamental about socialism forcing that transition from socialism to communism.
Again, this has nothing to do with Socialism or Communism.
I have to disagree with you there, in a capitalist system the burden of care falls on the individual (see the American health care system), whereas in socialism and communism, that burden falls on the state. This is a key economic factor, I’m from NZ and the social healthcare system is really awesome, but as with everything we can see how it could be better.
The system has a capacity, if you want to increase that capacity you have to have the resources to do that. If your population is not growing (stable is not enough) then your health care system is always in danger of not having enough resource. The problem is that the system always need to grow, as we get better at improving the lives of people and increasing lifespan the burden from the elderly increases. The resources used to care for the elderly are finite and use up system capacity.
Even in a capitalist society the system has capacity limits, there is no amount of money that you can throw at it to increase your number of doctors tomorrow. You have X doctors today, this is not easily increased beyond the natural rate (X+new doctors-retiring doctors), all you can do is move the existing ones around.
You can use this argument for a lot of major points of expenditure; education, welfare, transport etc…but healthcare is starkly different between the different economic models.
That is the problem I was referring to in my original post, “economics is a very murky science”, I come from an engineering and physical sciences point of view. Good economic data is hard to come by, it is always contaminated with chaotic factors that cannot be controlled for. “Proof” may not be possible in economic science.
I also come from said POV, as do many on Lemmy. Simply casting doubt in spite of overwhelming evidence of goods getting cheaper and cheaper is not sufficient.
Because from a logical point of view, there is no necessity to go from socialism to communism. A country could easily decide that socialism is where they wan to stay. When something is necessarily true, not only does it always happen it must happen. That is the point I was trying to make, there is nothing fundamental about socialism forcing that transition from socialism to communism.
No, they cannot. Communism is advanced, developed Socialism. In the long, long run, either they move on from Socialism to Communism, or they fall back to Capitalism.
Communism is achieved when the entire globe becomes Socialist, money has been phased out (which becomes a necessity to avoid falling back into Capitalism), all Capitalism has been eradicated, and the previous elements of Capitalist society have fallen by the wayside.
Systems do not stay static, everything is in motion, even if it takes a long time.
I have to disagree with you there, in a capitalist system the burden of care falls on the individual (see the American health care system), whereas in socialism and communism, that burden falls on the state. This is a key economic factor, I’m from NZ and the social healthcare system is really awesome, but as with everything we can see how it could be better.
It also falls on the state in Capitalism.
The system has a capacity, if you want to increase that capacity you have to have the resources to do that. If your population is not growing (stable is not enough) then your health care system is always in danger of not having enough resource. The problem is that the system always need to grow, as we get better at improving the lives of people and increasing lifespan the burden from the elderly increases. The resources used to care for the elderly are finite and use up system capacity.
You can shift resources around as necessary. With replacement, you can still maintain a system.
Even in a capitalist society the system has capacity limits, there is no amount of money that you can throw at it to increase your number of doctors tomorrow. You have X doctors today, this is not easily increased beyond the natural rate (X+new doctors-retiring doctors), all you can do is move the existing ones around.
Generational shifts happen slowly and in full view. You can act accordingly, this is a process that lasts decades.
You can use this argument for a lot of major points of expenditure; education, welfare, transport etc…but healthcare is starkly different between the different economic models.
Generational shifts happen slowly and in full view. You can act accordingly, this is a process that lasts decades.
COVID happened in months, spread like wildfire and put a huge strain on healthcare systems worldwide. No amount of money thrown at the system would have increased capacity.
Which system IS stable? AFAICT every system ever has allowed some people more power than others and those people cleave more power to themselves over time. This appears to be how most empires fall
Good question! The oldest government still in operation appears to be San Marino, a tiny country near Italy, at around 415 years. Considering that even at a small size it’s only been around that long despite civilization being around 6000 years old, I think it’s safe to say we haven’t managed a system that has real staying power yet.
There’s hunter-gatherer tribes that have been more or less stable for over a thousand years. It’s said that the Nez Perce have lived on the Columbia River for 11,500 years.
kbin.life
Top