There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Does one have to be an iconoclast or revolutionary these days to be validly left? I consider myself to be left of center, and very much in favor of progressive policies.

However I find myself being disagreed with quite often, mostly for not advocating or cheering violence, “by any means possible” change, or revolutionary tactics. It would seem that I’m not viewed as authentically holding my view unless I advocate extreme, violent, or radical action to accomplish it.

Those seem like two different things to me.

Edit: TO COMMUNISTS, ANARCHISTS, OR ANYONE ELSE CALLING FOR THE OVERTHROW OF SOCIETY

THIS OBVIOUSLY ISN’T MEANT FOR YOU.

Kuori ,
@Kuori@hexbear.net avatar

if you agree with the aims of revolutionaries (a more just society) but disagree with their methods (violent revolution) then you need to prove your method is at least as effective as theirs

thus far, no such evidence exists. all societal progress has come at the expense of bloodshed. perhaps you’ll be the one to change that, but i very sincerely doubt it.

so to answer your question, yes.

axont ,

I make one “sort of” exception for Czechoslovakia. I regard it as the only time a country became socialist by voting on it, but they had to do a coup with the implicit threat of violence to enforce the new government. The communists won a plurality in 1946 and had a coalition government. Fearing that they’d lose power, they began stacking the cops and courts with ideological communists. This fear turned out to be true after the liberal parties kept doing sneaky tactics to undermine the socialists. So in 1948 the communists had a coup to consolidate power and ally with the USSR.

And I know this wasn’t “bloodless” or “civil” since this all happened in the shadow of WW2.

Kuori ,
@Kuori@hexbear.net avatar

excellent historical context comrade. :3

they had to do a coup with the implicit threat of violence to enforce the new government

OP would do well to pay attention to this bit in particular as (a version of) this basic framework is also how civil rights groups like the suffragettes and the err civil rights movement progressed their struggles. MLK et al were able to be nonviolent because the implicit threat of more radical black nationalist groups existed. without the backing of force nonviolent protest is easy to ignore by those in power, as we’ve seen with every left-leaning protest movement since the collapse of the USSR

Alaskaball ,
@Alaskaball@hexbear.net avatar

This is off topic but is there something wrong with the hexbear client or is everyone here just making individual comments at each other instead of replying?

Erika3sis ,
@Erika3sis@hexbear.net avatar

Which client are you using?

Alaskaball ,
@Alaskaball@hexbear.net avatar

Well it doesn’t necessarily matter anymore because your reply fixed it lol

Sickos ,
@Sickos@hexbear.net avatar

Do you wish to stop capitalism? Do you think the bourgeoisie will willingly give up their cushy lives and positions of power?

Melatonin OP ,

No?

fox ,

If someone lives like a king, but directly because their wealth is earned by the suffering and death of thousands, is it not morally just to stop them? At what point is the life of one billionaire worth more than the life of the, say, five hundred children that starved to death because of that billionaire? Is the system of economics that results in that not utterly reprehensible?

We want capitalism to stop killing people. It cannot stop killing people. So we must dismantle capitalism. But the bourgeoisie will defend, violently, the perpetuation of capitalism. Thus, they are taking on a direct moral responsibility for the deaths capitalism causes.

Revolution is only violent because capitalists wield violence to brutally suppress even peaceful protests, and we must respond in kind to defend ourselves. The violence of self-defense is not the same as the violence of oppressors. If the capitalists saw peaceful protests and willingly put their fortunes aside and returned their means of production to common ownership, there would be no need for revolution. But in all history of this struggle they’ve chosen instead to maim and murder protestors.

As a snapshot, Food Not Bombs are an anarchist group who do nothing but give food to the unhoused. Police will arrest every FNB member to stop them, when what they’re doing is literally just feeding the poor. But if FNB members carry firearms, police leave them alone, and the unhoused receive food.

Sickos ,
@Sickos@hexbear.net avatar

If that’s “no” to the first part, you’re simply not a leftist. If that’s “no” to the second part, welcome to team violence.

gAlienLifeform ,
@gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world avatar

I already dropped one wall of text on this post, but something you might find interesting - there was a history podcast called Revolutions that looked at revolutionary periods in history, when it wrapped up the host did a whole series of appendix episodes on different recurring themes he saw in the different periods he looked at, and in one of those he talked about how the word “radical” can be hard to define because throughout history there were people who had radical goals they wanted to achieve through moderate means and people who had moderate goals they wanted to achieve through radical means and the inverse of both of those

yewtu.be/watch?v=0nukt_9HmLE&t=2m21s

So yeah, I think it’s helpful to separate out how big a transformation in society you want to see from how far you’re willing to go to get them

Sickos ,
@Sickos@hexbear.net avatar

TO COMMUNISTS, ANARCHISTS, OR ANYONE ELSE CALLING FOR THE OVERTHROW OF SOCIETY

THIS OBVIOUSLY ISN’T MEANT FOR YOU.

Ok boomer.

muad_dibber ,
@muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml avatar

Here’s an excellent overview on why pacifism doesn’t work, and has never worked.

Red Phoenix - Pacifism - How to do the enemy’s job for them. Youtube Audiobook

ProfessorOwl_PhD ,
@ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net avatar

Edit: TO COMMUNISTS, ANARCHISTS, OR ANYONE ELSE CALLING FOR THE OVERTHROW OF SOCIETY

THIS OBVIOUSLY ISN’T MEANT FOR YOU.

You’re asking why radical leftists reject your reformism. Who other than radical leftists are going to give you an actual answer instead of a pat on the back?

Anyway the answer is liberalism is far more violent, it just exports the violence overseas and commits it at an industrialised level. The infamous “Terror” in France only killed a few thousand people - the Iraq war killed over a million. While millions were killed in the cultural revolution, hundreds of millions were killed by the British Raj. Revolutionary violence is in fact far less violent than regular capitalism, so you’re hated for supporting its continuation.

TheDoctor ,
@TheDoctor@hexbear.net avatar

You are to the right of communists, who will not consider you “validly left” unless your ideology is anti-capitalist at a bare minimum. We consider capitalism to be the greatest cause of violence in the 20th and 21st centuries.

Alternately, you are to the left of fascists, who would consider you “validly left” as they rounded you up for the camps. Validity is all relative.

On another note, I think you massively misunderstand the difference between calls for revolutionary leftist violence and random people cheering on Trump getting shot, for example.

Erika3sis ,
@Erika3sis@hexbear.net avatar

TO COMMUNISTS, ANARCHISTS, OR ANYONE ELSE CALLING FOR THE OVERTHROW OF SOCIETY

THIS OBVIOUSLY ISN’T MEANT FOR YOU.

It takes either a complete lack of self-awareness or a simply incredible amount of gall to ask a yes-no question and then tell all the people most likely to answer one way to zip it. You might as well have just written “la-la-la-la I can’t heaaaar yoooou”

Melatonin OP ,

You misunderstand me. It’s simply that it’s a GIVEN that those people would advocate violence. There isn’t any need for them to respond. Their position is known.

It’s like as if I asked if it’s okay to charge over 20% interest on a loan. And all the credit card executives and buy here pay here owners and loan sharks started saying YEAH OF COURSE IT IS!

I kind of already knew where they stood. It’s the same with you.

DoiDoi ,
@DoiDoi@hexbear.net avatar

deleted_by_author

    •
    Melatonin OP ,

    Yep, I have no interest at all in living under a communist dictatorship. If see you’ve seen another kind of communism, please let me know what it is. I’d love to be informed about it.

    Maybe a lot more violence needs to take place before it works right.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Yep, I have no interest at all in living under a communist dictatorship. If see you’ve seen another kind of communism, please let me know what it is. I’d love to be informed about it.

    PRC, Cuba, USSR, Vietnam, etc. are good examples of societies that were organized along Communist lines, and came with drastic reductions in Poverty and drastic increases in life expectancy and freedom as opposed to previous conditions.

    Maybe a lot more violence needs to take place before it works right.

    What do you mean?

    KrasMazov ,
    @KrasMazov@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    Yeah yeah, continue to spout your anti-communist propaganda. You already live in a dictatorship, you’re just to propagandized to realize it.

    The only dictatorship we want is that of the proletariat, as opposed to the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. That is, a true popular democracy.

    Maybe listen to what other people have to say and go read communist theory before saying anything you don’t know about.

    As it stands your position is not left in any stretch of the imagination.

    Kuori ,
    @Kuori@hexbear.net avatar

    I’d love to be informed about it.

    that is a blatant lie. this entire thread is a monument to your willful ignorance.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    You’re asking leftists, the vast majority of which are Revolutionary. Only listening to a minority of Leftists for their opinion and ignoring the majority only gives you an incomplete and biased view.

    muad_dibber ,
    @muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    The fact that you think communists advocate for violence for its own sake (because you think we’re all bloodthirsty or something), tells us you have no idea what communists views are.

    This is an opportunity for you to learn from others, not close your ears because you’ve been inundated with a lifetime of anti-communist propaganda.

    FunkyStuff ,

    If all those people disagree with you, what kinds of people do you imagine would say yes? Nancy Pelosi? Chelsea Clinton?

    Melatonin OP , (edited )

    Well believe it or not, communists and anarchists are a fairly small minority of the group that would be “the left” if you call the other guys “the right.”

    I expect it’s more than two people I could hear from…🙄

    Anyway this post sort of answered the question. The violent talk is coming from socialists, communists, and anarchists here on Lemmy, which have a very unified voice and shout down opposition.

    Although I’m sure if they had anything they had to actually run (like a country) they’d be an absolute horror show of fighting, arguing, and bloodbathing each other until they got to the point where the strongest survived and could impose their vision of utopia on the masses.

    FunkyStuff ,

    What? What other groups make up the left then? Do they wield political power? Have they ever gotten to wield political power? Because the only left that has ever gotten to wield political power and use it to liberate the working people from capitalist oppression are the ones who were willing to pick up a gun and fight.

    FunkyStuff ,

    Although I’m sure if they had anything they had to actually run (like a country) they’d be an absolute horror show of fighting, arguing, and bloodbathing each other until they got to the point where the strongest survived and could impose their vision of utopia on the masses.

    China is currently installing the equivalent of 5 nuclear power stations’ worth of solar and wind power every week.

    Meanwhile in the west AOC and Bernie groveled at the feet of the democratic party by endorsing Biden’s genocidal regime and all they got in return was Biden announcing a plan to cap rent increases at 5%, which can only go through if they win the next election… against a fascist candidate who is far ahead of Biden in almost every swing state.

    See why we want revolution?

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Do you think the Left/Right divide is determined by the absolute median position, or is it determined by actual views, ie a general support for Socialism vs a general support for Capitalism?

    Although I’m sure if they had anything they had to actually run (like a country) they’d be an absolute horror show of fighting, arguing, and bloodbathing each other until they got to the point where the strongest survived and could impose their vision of utopia on the masses.

    Historically false for pretty much every AES country.

    MarxMadness ,

    shout down opposition

    This is a text forum, you can post or comment as much as you like. People chiming in with similar opinions =/= “shouting down opposition.”

    nephs ,

    We’re not advocating violence. Your premise is wrong.

    But we know our adversaries commonly use violence, so we’re aware it exists, and we know we have to prepare for it.

    Are colonialist governments not violent? How do you remove from office a government that commits violence against their people, en masse, to destroy their land with mining operations?

    Concrete example: how would the Congolese vote the French out, when anyone organising peacefully against the French is assassinated?

    The point is not violence. But it would be naive to ignore the violence of our adversaries.

    Kuori ,
    @Kuori@hexbear.net avatar

    O COMMUNISTS, ANARCHISTS, OR ANYONE ELSE CALLING FOR THE OVERTHROW OF SOCIETY

    THIS OBVIOUSLY ISN’T MEANT FOR YOU.

    lmao so liberals only then.

    FunkyStuff ,

    Yeah lol just validate my clearly very questionable view, you’re only allowed in this thread if you agree with me!

    match ,
    @match@pawb.social avatar

    Socdems are valid if underrepresented. Maybe start a socdem community?

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Are SocDems really “left” if they support Capitalism and are against Socialism?

    vzq ,

    If you define “left” as “communist” then obviously no. But out here in the actual world it usually means “anyone more progressive than a Christian Democrat”.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    I define “Left” as a supporter of Socialism, ie an Anticapitalist. Simple as, someone who supports a change in the status quo.

    vzq ,

    Well then you’re only real disagreement with social democrats is in method, and you are going to have the Ugly Talk.

    Cowbee , (edited )
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    No, Social Democrats have a different method, ie class colaborationism and Reformism, and a different structure, ie Capitalism with welfare, and Imperialism in the Nordic Countries’ cases.

    vzq ,

    Ah yes, the imperialist Nordic social democrats.

    What are you on about exactly?

    ZeroHora ,
    @ZeroHora@lemmy.ml avatar

    As a citzen in a social democracy in Latin America: This shit only truly worked in countries with a long history of exploitation of their colonies.

    vzq ,

    Fair. Large domestic reserves of fossile fuels don’t hurt either.

    It’s in many regards an expression of privilege.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    The Nordic Countries rely on Imperialism, ie the export of industrial and financial Capital to the Global South to super-exploit the proletariat of intentionally underdeveloped countries for super-profits via paying far less for their labor power.

    Why is it that it is cheaper to produce in the Global South? Because wages are lower, yet you can sell for a higher price, and therefore exploit at a higher rate from the international proletariat.

    Are you familiar in any way with Marxist theory?

    vzq ,

    Yes of course. It’s basically what the global economy has been like for fucking forever. It seems weird to single out the Nordic social democrats for this though.

    What are you trying to get at here?

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Yes of course. It’s basically what the global economy has been like for fucking forever.

    Yes, Colonialism and now Imperialism are brutal, but unfortunately have been long lasting.

    It seems weird to single out the Nordic social democrats for this though.

    The Nordic Countries, ie the scandinavian model, depends on Imperialism and makes no move against this. If a Capitalist, developed country moves towards Social Democracy, they will do nothing to change this Imperialism.

    What are you trying to get at here?

    Capitalism isn’t Socialism, ergo Social Democrats have little in common with Leftists.

    muad_dibber ,
    @muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    Look at where H&M or IKEA have most of their factories. Super-exploited wage workers in the global south are funding (via a tax on imports of products they produced) the nordic welfare states.

    I suggest reading John Smith - Imperialism in the 21st century for more on this.

    andyburke ,
    @andyburke@fedia.io avatar

    Here on the fediverse we may be getting targeted by outside actors who want nothing more than to foment violence in western democracies.

    True leftists reject violence in all forms. It is coercion. It is evil. End of story.

    The only time violence is justified 8a in self defense or the defense of others. Political change must be achieved through peaceful means if you want the result to have any chance of enduring.

    Anyone on here advocating for violence deaerves to be labeled for what they are: part of the problem with the world today.

    Cowbee , (edited )
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Here on the fediverse we may be getting targeted by outside actors who want nothing more than to foment violence in western democracies.

    What is the origin of this statement? That people disagree with you, and therefore must be foreign agents? If you go back to the founding of Lemmy, the Marxists and Anarchists were here first. If anything, the influx of Liberals from Reddit can be considered “outside actors.”

    True leftists reject violence in all forms. It is coercion. It is evil. End of story.

    Are you genuinely saying that Karl Marx was not a “True Leftist?” Kropotkin? Goldman? Fred Hampton? Che? Dessalines?

    The only time violence is justified 8a in self defense or the defense of others. Political change must be achieved through peaceful means if you want the result to have any chance of enduring.

    Revolution is self-defense against failing and violent Capitalism. Leftists don’t support random acts of terror.

    Additionally, Political Change has never been meaningfully achieved via peaceful means. Abolition of Slavery, the Civil Rights Movement, the overthrow of Tsarism in Russia and fascism in Cuba, all stemmed from violence or the implicit threat of violence.

    Anyone on here advocating for violence deaerves to be labeled for what they are: part of the problem with the world today.

    Do you believe Leftists here support violence for the sake of violence? No, it’s because there is no alternative.

    muad_dibber ,
    @muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    Those “western countries” you’re referring to, are not democracies, its more accurate to call them capitalist dictatorships.

    Capitalists stand above and control the political system, stack candidates to those who’ve proven themselves to be good little capitalists puppets, and own the organs of media and limit public discussion to pro-capitalist talking points.

    True leftists reject violence in all forms. It is coercion. It is evil. End of story.

    Anyone on here advocating for violence deaerves to be labeled for what they are: part of the problem with the world today.

    There’s no need to “one-true-leftist” us here, especially since the major branches of leftism (Marxism and most branches of Anarchism), are all pretty much agreed that pacifism doesn’t work, and is a strategy promoted by capitalists and petit-bourgeois idealists to quell dissent. A ruling class has never given up their power or wealth without violence or the threat of violence. Good article on this:

    Red Phoenix - Pacifism - How to do the enemy’s job for them. Youtube Audiobook

    theshatterstone54 ,

    Is Dessalines the dude that made Jerboa, the Lemmy Client?

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    It’s the same Dessalines who made and continues to develop Lemmy itself, as well as Jerboa.

    SharkEatingBreakfast , (edited )
    @SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz avatar

    Hey OP. Please look up the “Stonewall riots”.

    Directly fighting against the forces that are making & enforcing laws that can & will do harm is the right thing to do. If the people in power / enforcing unfair practices see they are unopposed, they will become stronger in their positions. Complacency allows imbalance.

    Will I break windows for Gaza? No. I will not. Who will that help? Who am I fighting? That kind of thing is nonsense.

    Will I fight police that are attacking students for protesting? YES. YES I WILL. Because if you fight back, they will understand that you will not allow yourself to be walked all over by unjust enforcement. They will think twice about attacking students next time, because they know people are willing to fight back. If they do not encounter opposition, they know they are safe to do whatever they want.

    In short: once a bully realizes that you will hit back, they are less inclined to bully you. Even more so if you are backed up by more people who also hate the bully.

    EDIT: To be fair, I don’t hope for “collapse”. However, I do understand why people do. The corrupt system goes so deep that collapse may be the only way to dismantle it, as it is beyond any kind of reform.

    Do I want collapse? No. But, unfortunately, it may be necessary. The system cannot be fixed without being dismantled, and I’m not optimistic that we will experience a miracle.

    Melatonin OP ,

    Good sane take, to my understanding

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    This is everyone’s take here.

    SharkEatingBreakfast ,
    @SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz avatar

    I think it’s all about how it’s said. The simpler, the better. Phrasing is important, too.

    CanadaPlus , (edited )

    Gatekeeping is dumb. You are what you are, the rest is description.

    Also, this is a pretty communist instance, so it’s no wonder you got “lol liberal” responses. Maybe try .world for a wider perspective on a question like this.

    Edit: Or another large, politically generic instance, like sh.itjust.works.

    Cowbee , (edited )
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Gatekeeping is dumb, but so is calling a square a circle.

    Secondly, Lemmy.world actually blocks Leftist instances, while Lemmy.ml does not. You see a wider net on Lemmy.ml, Lemmy.world leans right-wing.

    Edit: sh.itjust.works has a large fascist problem, it generally leans right wing overall.

    CanadaPlus , (edited )

    Ah shit, you replied before my edit. Yes, communication is important, but only exists in context. Asking if you’re “validly” X is pure gatekeeping. The question is if “I’m X” makes what you are more or less confusing to whoever you’re talking to. Although, people rarely ask.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    I generally agree, actually, you can see my top level comment. The question is deliberately posed in a leading manner, Purity Testing is nonsense sectarianism.

    Still, the bit on .world doesn’t make much sense, .world explicitly blocks Marxist instances.

    CanadaPlus ,

    Yes, sorry, didn’t know.

    Edit: Although OP isn’t on one. Or at least dbzer0 isn’t to my knowledge.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    dbzer0 is generally an Anarchist instance, though there are Marxists. They are federated with Lemmy.world to my knowledge.

    CanadaPlus ,

    Also TIL!

    muad_dibber ,
    @muad_dibber@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    lemmy.world (and blahaj.zone) blocks the communist instances, yet they aren’t blocked by us. So really you’re only going to get a censored and anti-communist perspective from those instances.

    CanadaPlus ,

    TIL, although OP isn’t on one.

    It still seems pretty lefty over there for the most part.

    GrappleHat ,
    @GrappleHat@lemmy.ml avatar

    There’s no room for centrists on the internet. I seem to only find centrists in real life, face-to-face. I guess we aren’t loud but we’re here.

    (Now here come the downvotes…)

    FunkyStuff ,

    Moralists don’t really have beliefs. Sometimes they stumble on one, like on a child’s toy left on the carpet. The toy must be put away immediately. And the child reprimanded. Centrism isn’t change – not even incremental change. It is control. Over yourself and the world. Exercise it. Look up at the sky, at the dark shapes of Coalition airships hanging there. Ask yourself: is there something sinister in moralism? And then answer: no. God is in his heaven. Everything is normal on Earth.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Why are you a centrist? If someone tells you waterfalls flow downward, and someone else tells you waterfalls flow upward, do you synthesize them into saying waterfalls remain perfectly still?

    Where does centrism come from, and is it just arbitrary?

    GrappleHat ,
    @GrappleHat@lemmy.ml avatar

    Lol!!! No, no, no!! My centrism is not arbitrary!! I don’t try to find a “middle ground” where waterfalls go both ways!!! Love the visual though!

    I align with the political right on some issues, and the left with others. And in American politics I find the rhetoric & tribalism of both political parties ridiculous - so I can’t identify with either.

    Generally I lean left of center, but I can’t go “full left” because I think the left has some blind spots. And liberals do this annoying thing where they seem to be always be falling all over themselves to prove how self-righteous & progressive they are, & they wind up alienating left-leaning people like me as a result.

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    Are you referring to liberals as “the left?” I think we are talking about different things here.

    GrappleHat ,
    @GrappleHat@lemmy.ml avatar

    Perhaps so. I’m in the US where lingo goes that “Democrats” & “Liberals” are “left”, " Republicans" & “Conservatives” are “right”.

    Not sure how that translates globally, so apologies if it’s confusing…

    Cowbee ,
    @Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

    That’s the Overton Window, a peak into a country’s local positions with respect to the median. Generally, however, leftism is associated with Socialism, ie Worker Ownership of the Means of Production, while rightism refers to Capitalism, ie individual ownership of the Means of Production.

    With respect to this post, Revolutionary Leftists are entierely Socialists, whether they be Anarchists or Marxists, not Liberals.

    On the global scale, you would be considered right-wing, as America in general is a far-right country.

    Wes4Humanity ,

    Democrats=liberals and they aren’t “left”, they are only left of conservatives, and even then, only on social issues. Dems/libs are conservatives when it comes to fiscal/economic stuff. Which is why the true left has no representation in the US when it comes to the economy, and the 2 capitalist conservative parties will never allow them to have any.

    MarxMadness ,

    I align with the political right on some issues, and the left with others.

    What are some examples of these issues?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •