It’s not about the gays vs straights or blacks vs whites or the Romulans vs The Federation. It’s about the billionaires vs everybody else. It’s a class war. It aways has been. And life is never going to improve for most of us until we figure out where the REAL source of our pain comes from. Like George Carlin once said:
“That’s the way the ruling class works in any society. They keep the lower and middle classes fighting with each other so that they . . . the rich . . . can run off with all the f*cking money.”
If you think capitalism didn't create and still heavily relies on racism, sexism, ableism, cisheteronormativity and so on (and no, comparing real life oppressed groups to fictional characters doesn't help) to literally exist, you've not been paying any attention.
The state is part of the superstructure that is shaped by the economic base, which is in turned maintained by said superstructure. However, changes in the superstructure are never transformative unless they also come with radical change to the mode of production. Billionaires, and the capitalist class as a whole, completely block the path for the workers to seize the means and reshape society towards progress. It doesn’t matter what faffing idiot you put in power in the state, when the economic base keeps operating with the same logic of capitalist extraction.
Politicians are part of the state, which is shaped by the economic system which, in most of the world, is currently capitalism.
The root of the problem is class society and the capitalist system where the ruling class are the capitalists. So it doesn’t really matter who the politicians are until the economic system, and thus the ruling class, are changed, which can only happen by organizing outside the capitalist political system whose only purpose is to protect capital.
Because you think we end capitalism an poof, all other problems are gone?
Sure, can’t overcome e.g. racism without overcoming capitalism, but also can’t really have a better society without addressing the discrimination in the system.
If some other working class member tells you about the discrimination he receives, and you make the face in the meme, you’re helping capitalists by splitting the working class.
The fights are interwoven guys, can’t do “this first” or “that first”
You need to address the problems (yes that means also cultural ones) and stand together in solidarity to have a chance of building a better system.
Splitting the working class by making this face when people talk about how they are discriminated just because your not affected is only helping capitalists
Class inequality is not the same thing as anti capitalism. I like capitalism. I see it as a vehicle for those who contribute being rewarded.
We have classist structures outside of more things than business. Politics is the big one, but it’s nowhere near the only one. I’m for tearing down those who get power without needing to demonstrate the skill needed to wield it. Those that are given it either through nepotism or cronyism.
I truly believe that the system doesn’t care about race or gender or whatever. It cares about looking after it’s friends. If you’re not in the club you’re trodden underfoot. So pitting black against white and man against woman is a distraction. We all need to be fighting together against the “landed gentry”.
Management not providing their employees with adequate tools to do their job while also keeping them in the dark about the greater picture of their company. Ignoring their employee’s problems and then blaming those who try to solve it on their own.
I think a good comedic example of this is in Futurama, where some characters from the year 3000 get tossed back to Roswell in 1947. They try to blend with “period correct clothes” and lingo, but since they’re 1000 years out of place, they’re combining things that hadn’t been invented yet with stuff from 1947s past.
A lot of people seem to think cleopatra was hanging out with the dudes who built the pyramids and think it’s weird Sparta and Rome never went to war. I mean, sure technically they both existed in an overlapping period of about 50 years, but technically the USA has had diplomatic contact with the Holy Roman Empire for a few years.
Imagine if a shuttle landed on the planet and someone from 2402 popped out with their neon implants, xarthan death spikes proudly displayed, and an onion on their belt. Everyone knows they don’t show up until at least 2215.
I always assume people doing this are unhinged/crazy and I definitely don’t want to deal with that.
Sometimes they look nice enough.
Usually what happens is myself and everyone else on the train look at each other, have a shared look of “Morons? Am I right?” and then when that person leaves, we all share a group laugh.
So I guess what I’d say is, if you do this, know that everyone is laughing at you. If you say you don’t care, that’s a lie, you do care, that’s why you’re doing what you’re doing. This is not positive attention, this is negative attention. Please take a moment and reflect to be a force for positivity and not negativity.
Genuinely not necessarily true. I used to do this when I was younger. It wasn’t because I wanted attention, I just like the feeling of being surrounded by music
Genuinely, the world does not want to always take part in what you want. There are rules to society that most of us at least try to follow out of respect. Time and place to be surrounded by music. I’d definitely say on the bus or train is not the time or place. Agree?
I don’t personally do it myself just because I know the majority finds it disrespectful, but I actually enjoy it, especially when they are playing a good song and i can audile who the artist is.
So true. I have an older pair of headphones and they’re still the best sound I can get for my music. It’s the MOST immersive, not only like the sound is all around me, but right inside my head.
The new trend I’ve noticed, actually is people SINGING/RAPPING along to the music on their headphones, like, fully as if they were the only ones there, while on a packed train.
I mean, i guess it’s better because it’s not as loud as their shitty Bluetooth speaker at max volume peaking like crazy, but it is super weird and very fuckin annoying.
Like, cool, we get it you’re so super confident and think youre as cool as the person you’re listening to in one of their music videos. But you’re not. Because you sound like shit and you’re a dick. Everyone else is getting through this train ride, why the fuck do you think we want to hear YOUR rendition of what you’re listening to? Like, I really can’t decide which is worse. One is way louder but one is way fuckin weirder. People who do either of these are true assholes.
Some guy got stabbed on the subway in Toronto a few months back because he asked a guy playing music to turn it off. It really is a crazy world out there.
Why a lot of people on Lemmy like communist so much? As a person who grow up in a country which is almost destroyed by the communist party in the past I don’t know what to say just why?, capitalist or not it’s depends on your own country’s government, at least you still can talking shit about them without getting arrested and torture to death, have we not learn from the past or other communist country, why don’t you live in North Korea or China and see how’ve you like it
So you think that The Christ was a moron? He is the literal archetype bearded, sandal wearing, tree hugging cursing (ok that one is weird), hippie. Hell, he told his followers to go live in communes…
Saying that any existing communist party looks like what we, or theory, want(s), is like saying that North Korea is a Democratic Republic because it’s part of the name. Authoritarians love corrupting the meaning of words so they can keep people ignorant.
Capitalism is sadly doing exactly what it’s designed to do there’s just a lot of propaganda to mislead you such as the infamous trickle down economics idea
Not really. The US has completely unchecked capitalism if you aren’t wealthier than $100,000,000, as does the rest of the world thanks to a court that the IMF set up. If your country has a resource the capitalists want to exploit, and the people or government don’t allow it, they will sue you in this international court and use the US military to impose fines of billions of dollars per year in “lost revenue.” Much of Africa and South America can tell you all about it.
Capitalism and communism are economic systems not political theory.
ah yes because politics (the management of people at large scale) and economics (the management of things people need to live at large scale) are totally unrelated and have no intrinsic links
NK’s highest legislative body is a multiparty parliament elected directly by the people.
“Oh but the communists dominate”
Yeah, because they do popular things and have a popular political program compared to the other parties.
Is it more democratic when no one party is popular because all of them don’t help the proletariat and power is a hot potato passed to whatever bourgeois party fucked the people the longest time ago?
I’m going to take your question as genuine and answer in equal.
It’s a bit more complicated than that. Most leftists will agree with you, the USSR and other Eastern Europe countries that were communist did a lot of damage and most likely more harm. They committed atrocities. They were authoritarian. It was disgusting.
The leftists who still prop those countries up on their shoulders are what many call tankies. Today they sing praise about Russia, China, and North Korea, but your observation is correct, they won’t ever move there. These are individuals who repeat propaganda and are, ultimately, just red fascists. When you actually dig into their ideals they parallel and sometimes mirror Nazis.
I believe leftism cannot have an authoritarian element to it. I think most social hierarchies need to be destroyed. I think the only way to have a socialist society is through democratic means. Democracy in the workplace and national level. I think most of us can agree workers need higher wages and there is a wealth gap that needs to be dismantled. I think most of us believe healthcare needs to be universal, food and shelter and water, education, information (internet), speech, and much more should be free and readily available. There is this element of freedom that needs to be achieved that isn’t found the countries that are “communist”.
I don’t want to explicitly say those communist countries wasn’t “real communism”, but fascists, authoritarianism, always appropriate from progressive movement. There is no freedom, especially of workers, under a dictatorship. If workers are starving, dying, being outright black bagged and killed, i don’t think that can be considered communist.
The last paragraph comes across as about “no true Scotsman” as it gets. Maybe true IRL communism is as much fiction as the star trek depiction of it is.
That’s the point of my concluding paragraph. I am acknowledging that fallacy. So I ask, if freedom is an actual component to socialism, communism, or anarchism, then is the USSR actually a communist state? I can easily argue North Korea isn’t. China and Russia aren’t socialist at all. Russia is an oligopoly and China is just state capitalism.
So what is “true socialism”? I don’t think we can ever achieve. We can’t have a “perfect” society, but I do think we can get close enough having workers been more in control of their labor, be more democratic, and not live in an authoritarian state. We may not 100% be able to live in a Star Trek universe but I think we can get quite close.
The former is operating illegally amidst intense violence that they have as much responsibility for as the Mexican government and the latter have committed ethnic cleansing. So I’m not sure why you think they are good examples. Unless you think socialism means people must be killed.
Hello, I’d like to speak for people I disagree with
As a leftist whose platform doesn’t seem to include a word about abolishing capitalism, any time I am challenged by someone to the left of Bernie Sanders, I turn into a right wing crank telling people ‘if you don’t like it get out’
And today I’d like to tell you about horseshoe theory
Yes, anti-Tankies are verry simmlar to Tankies. However, I think the commenter is coping by being an anti-tankie. Both groups can becone and come back from crazy. People can also safely hold tankie and anti-tankie like beleafs but (like a lot of ideology) run the risk of becoming crazy.
amaricentric peoples perspective (wrough draft probably wrong)“Tankie” nationallists fail to see the raising over time evil and fantisize the good and the ones who passionately hate Tankies (im guilty of it) fail to see the good slowly rotting away. Then we say the whole country never changed throuout its lifetime, one points to the beginnigng the other points to the end. Places like the Soviate Union from my limited knolage seem to be a nation with slowly growing leadership alignment problems, slowly using things like nationalism and subverting democracy to flip who should be masters and who should be slaves.
Absolutely, internal divisions suck. (What people are calling) Tankie and anti tankie ideas have the potential to be useful if and when its not an ideologial snare.
I have never seen a communist claim that the modern Russian government is good or communist, only that it opposes western hegemony, to the occasional benefit of poor nations in the global south.
It’s a bit more complicated than that. Most leftists will agree with you, the USSR and other Eastern Europe countries that were communist did a lot of damage and most likely more harm. They committed atrocities. They were authoritarian. It was disgusting.
Most leftists are literally marxist leninists or some derivative of ML in socialist countries. I think you mean most white leftists in the imperial core when you say most leftists.
I think you might call me an FDR New Deal socialist. I’m in favor of things like social security and government public works projects.
It has been my experience as a lifelong American that “capitalism” is just feudalism, or a desperate attempt to return to feudalism. “Capitalists” aka the ruling class have all the “capital” aka enough resources to actually accomplish anything. When any normal citizen wants to start a business, they have to beg a capitalist for a loan of some type, possibly selling “stock” aka a loan that never pays to term, allowing the capitalists to leech off of your profits basically forever. Wages get lower, costs get higher, all to funnel as much wealth to a small upper class. The myth of the meritocracy, where he with the best ideas, the best inventions, the most innovation, the product most in demand is he one that succeeds…doesn’t hold up in a world of patent trolling or felony contempt of business model we’re currently in. Doesn’t stop them from parroting it to keep the little people quiet though.
Meanwhile I’m not aware of a “communist” nation that ever actually was. I am unaware of a nation that has ever actually operated per “to each according to his ability, from each according to his need” workers owning the means of production etc. They’ve all turned out as dictatorships with command economies. I mean, show me a country where the workers’ unions are actually the ones in power. No, you’ve got the likes of North Korea, Russia and China building empty skyscrapers, building entire cities that sit empty, demolishing brand new apartment complexes because the floors aren’t safe to walk on. The government told us to build it, so we built it. I get punished if I don’t, and I don’t get rewarded for doing a good job. The man that wrote Tetris didn’t earn a single kopek.
Okay, a “fdr new deal socialist” isnt a thing. FDR was a social democrat which isn’t socialist. The new deal was a social democrat policy, not socialist.
Please consider reading “the abc’s of socialism” it is a good introduction to socialist thought.
Are there any statistics on where the most (convinced) leftists currently live? Just wondering. Not talking about people who are forced to adhere to authoritarian systems to survive or further their career.
There are literally 100 million members of the CPC. If .1 percent of them earnestly believe in communist thought that is more than the total members of communist orgs in the US.
In the “capitalism did better than communism/socialism” debate i still feel a great lack of historical context. Eastern Europe has been largely destroyed by the Nazis. China has lived through brutal Japanese occupation and a genocide of 10 Million people. Korea has been subject to a war emplyoing terrible new weapons such as Napalm to bring great destruction.
Meanwhile the US homeland has been faring without any destruction, France surrendered quick enough to avoid most damage and the UK sucessfully fended off the Nazi attacks so the damage was limited.
Purely economically speaking the Western allies were off to a much better start than the Eastern countries. So i would argue that for the economical question, it remains impossible to claim capitalism to be superior to socialism. Otherwise authoritarianism is always to the detriment of the people.
Because they are reacting to living under the oppressive structures of late capitalism. Having been raised in a capitalist world, they naturally overemphasize economic systems and their alternatives and make assumptions about government.
So when they communism theyusually mean communism + some equitable government or just they mean socialist democracy.
Funnily enough, you live pretty well in China these days if you’re a good little capitalist.
Though to be fair, DPRK is the way it is at least in part thanks to the Americans obliterating their cities and farm land. But we can ignore history to make a “I used to be in a communist country and it’s bad, trust me bro” statement.
And I agree, I prefer to live in a system where prisoners aren’t primarily minorities or political prisoners. And where the prison system isn’t the most populated in the world, and rife with for-profit forced labour.
I would also be curious to hear which definition of “capitalism” and “Communism” you are using. That is, if you are open to dialogue.
Not to mention NK is economically blockaded and has to endure yearly military provocations by the largest military in the world. No wonder why they take draconian measures.
They take draconian measures because they’re held hostage by one of the world’s most powerful and effective crime families. One only needs to look at South Korea to see that it doesn’t have to be this way.
True, the south manages to have a rising GDP and the world’s worst rates of suicide, and some of the longest working hours of anywhere, while being held hostage by that same crime family. That is the difference you can expect while you kiss the boot of the empire responsible for segregating your country and preventing any attempts of reunification.
We have never seen an actual communist country. USSR for example was a fascist dictatorship which runs directly counter to the first property of communism, it must be stateless.
Facists like the Nazis like to claim they are for the people and sadly the only “communism” we’ve seen so far has been carried out by their hands. This is similar to how Nazis were supposedly progressive… Hopefully we can agree that is obviously not the case.
I’d say the fact that leftist socialist or communist movements keep decaying into authoritarian dictatorships is a pretty big weakness of communism, actually. I think Western capitalist countries are not perfect by any means, but they’re winning the quality of life game, even of poor people.
Not decaying. The Nazis were always fascist they put on a front of being progressive to ganrner support which worked quite well as we can tell from history. By the time it became obvious they weren’t really progressive they were already in power.
The Cuban people literally joke that the government should be less democratic because of how much they consult the people, I dont think it is an authoritarian dictatorship and it is under immense pressure as it is 70 miles away from the imperial core and has been effectively blockaded for 60 years or so.
Sure, different ones have different levels of dictorshipness. To be clear, democratic and authoritarian are not opposites at all. Chattel slavery in the US was extremely authoritarian and awful, yet it was democratic. Abolition was a minority viewpoint until around the time of the Civil War.
Don’t call communists fascists please. This is an article from a mainstream holocaust historian that explains why a related equation between the two is harmful.
I would also recommend reading “economy and class structure of german fascism” so you have a better idea of what fascism actually means.
A number of reasons. Just like you claim a Communist party almost destroyed your country, Capitalist parties destroy and are destroying many countries as well. The existence of bad Communist parties does not itself mean Communism is structurally a bad thing, as pursuit of a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society is a noble goal for humanity.
I think it’s fair to say that decentralization is a good check against Authoritarianism, and as such, this should be extended to the workplace, not just government.
As far as why Lemmy leans left, the founder is a Communist, and principles of decentralization and federation tend to appeal far more to leftists, while Capitalist-inclined individuals have Reddit.
principles of decentralization and federation tend to appeal far more to leftists
Absolute load of shit, just like your false dichotomy of capitalism vs communism. Neither affects politics. In fact countries are being destroyed by the same type of people, they don’t give a fuck if they’re playing communism or capitalism today.
… As for why majority of countries are capitalist and not the system that has never been tried, that’s because people always want to outsource decisions to someone else and when the people own means of production, there can be no production, only people inclined to produce do produce.
Classless society is impossible when 80% of people are worthless lackeys and only 20% of people even dream of doing something.
You’re the one whose feelings get hurt every time I tell you that the only ones who implemented communism successfully have no feelings. They don’t even have a brain, ants and bees are more like machines, unlike humans who have hopes, dreams, and aspirations, and some humans aspire to rock the boat which is why goymmunism will never ever work in our species.
What would a human who has hopes, dreams, and aspirations do to rock the boat in Communism? Why do you think Communism is based on requiring everyone not have hopes, dreams, and aspirations?
You don’t actually know, your feelings are just hurt and so you lash out.
when 80% of people are worthless lackeys and only 20% of people even dream of doing something.
Man, I thought you said yesterday that your parents raised you right? The more I see you, the more it’s clear that they mostly just raised a cynical asshole. I guess that’s par for the course for a troll picking fights on obscure social media
It’s a for-profit, Capitalist business that runs it, ergo its Capitalist. The user base is largely liberal, which is still pro-Capitalism. You tend to see more Anarchists and Communists on Lemmy by proportion.
I was born into this world for no other reason than to be intolerant towards self righteous idiots like yourself who do more harm than good with their naive infantile worldview.
Also if you pulled your head out of your ass, you’d notice I’ve been pretty tolerant of your stupidity, but it can only go so far. I’m not trying to sound less shitty either, I simply added more to my reply, the reasons as to why that you made up in your head aren’t my problem to deal with.
In the end, people like you end up full fascist psychopaths who kill people they don’t like because that’s better than allowing people to say things you don’t like.
The self righteous part in question that he’s born to be against, is literally just claiming to be tolerant. Not bludgeoning people with tolerance, not using tolerance as a weapon to silence people as he claims. Just labeling oneself “tolerant”, and the general idea of tolerance. He also spent several comments doubling down. Maybe go read the exchange and see for yourself?
Also, some of his other greatest hits include denying that the holocaust was so bad because “not all the jews died”, outright claiming that “Fossil fuels are recyclable” in a single sentence comment in a debate about why he thinks evs are bullshit, and laying out an explicit violent fantasy about magdumping into a theoretical person who might strike him for any reason.
One of his most recent comments just says, “violence has never not worked”
Do go read some of his exchanges for yourself and determine if I’m just poisoning the well.
It’s not so much the existence of bad communism that indicates communism is a structurally bad thing, quite so much as the utter lack of good communism that indicates communism is a structurally bad thing.
It’s an unfortunately nuanced subject, where people don’t agree on the underlying definitions of words. For instance, I think you’re confusing “capitalism” with “democracy”. You can have authoritarian undemocratic capitalist countries, where you can’t talk shit about your government.
For me personally, I think communism has too many issues to actually try, but I like some of its theoretical tennants when compared to that of capitalism. Those goals are something to strive for. The spirit of communism is helping eachother and rewarding work, and the spirit of capitalism is sacrificing others for personal gain
I’m a big fan of capitalism, but I appreciate your comment nonetheless. To me there’s nothing anti capitalist about sharing or wanting to take care of the people around you.
Well that’s just wrong. Capitalism is about profit, it’s anti capitalist to take care of others unless you’re profiting off of them. I’m not saying that I’m for or against capitalism, I’m just correcting your assertion.
Capitalism is about free markets. The arrangement of wage labor is an emergent result of allowing people to enter only into economic relations they consent to.
To take care of others for free is entirely fine, if it’s what you want to do. That doesn’t conflict with capitalism at all. The only difference is that under a free market people do that when they choose to, not when they are compelled to.
And what actually happens is that people choose to a lot.
That’s the cartoon version of capitalism just like how “socialism is when the government does something” is the cartoon version of socialism. Capitalism just means that the means of production in a society are owned and controlled by private owners instead of by workers or the government as a proxy for workers. It says nothing about whether people are compelled to be greedy or anti-sharing or something.
Capitalism is about taking everything you can, to act as a balance against everyone else doing the same, because the fundamental assumption is that greed is the natural state for people and we shouldn’t try to fight it. Under capitalism, competition doesn’t just apply to businesses in markets, it extends to everything: people must compete with those around them for resources (be it jobs, or food, or retirement investments), making human connection a primarily adversarial relationship.
Now nothing says that you must apply capitalist principals to every aspect of your life if you live in a capitalist society, but it slowly becomes the norm. Eventually, the reason people take care of eachother because is indirectly benefits themselves, rather than because its a good thing to do… And when that’s your justification, it’s easy to stop doing it.
It’s all about establishing norms about how people should treat eachother. Under capitalism the norm is adviseraial by design, but under communist it was supposed to be cooperative. It didn’t even up working that way, but that is the ideal we should strive towards.
I think a lot of people don’t want to admit that most political ideas ranging from communism to capitalism are half baked labels we stick onto a collection of beliefs about what works best to solve certain problems. If you got rid of the labels you might just ask the question of what works and where the money will come from
What ? Why do you have need to bring hostility to a peaceful conversation, where did he say that his father had slaves ?
My parents grew up in communism, and its true it did ruin some countries but it helped out too, its important to not keep this conversation black and white and use communism or capitalism as the ultimate solution to very difficult problem.
I read once that a major reason the coffee is supposed to be good, is that the animals (in the wild) tend to seek out the ripest, healthiest coffee beans to eat. They’re abundant (prior to human intervention), so why settle for less?
But then we cage them and force-feed them whatever, so they’re just medium (or low) quality beans to start with. So even if you look past the cruelty, it’s not even the quality of coffee the reputation suggests.
Iirc correctly the monkey cats ( or however they are called ) actually just prefer a specific coffee plant that is more rarely used as the ones used for the vast amount of coffee in the world ( e.g. robusta or arabica). However, if the beans of this variation are used directly, it tastes exactly the same. There is a scientific paper about this. Long story short: people are drinking shat out coffee for no good reason. What is even worse, it is tried to hold these monkey cats in cages to produce more of this coffee. Again for no good reason. But people fall for the marketing pr gang that the coffee is handpicked by those animals, digested and shat out and they would not go for “yeah we need just to use another plant” because it wouldn’t be so exklusive anymore…
The last Goth girl who I thought was gonna sacrifice me ended up just telling me she only liked me as a friend, not as a human sacrifice. Thats life I suppose.
And there’s a certain brilliance to that choice in that everyone, even if they don’t fully understand the statement and it’s implications, everyone always laughs.
He tricked the stupid half into laughing at their own stupidity.
I think a lot of the time people see stupidity in differences of values and limited visibility of the context the decision was made. I think this is why so many people think so many people are stupid. ‘Stupid people’ make choices that the observer sees as having ‘poor results’.
Like when a lane ends on the highway:
– People are stupid (and selfish) for not letting cars in when their lane ends (dangerous)
–People are stupid (and selfish) for waiting until the last minute to move over (dangerous)
– People are stupid for moving over well before their lane ends (missed opportunity to get ahead)
– people are stupid for being in either of those lanes that merge when there is a third lane that doesn’t merge… (short sighted and dangerous) (no I won’t let them in! They should have thought ahead)
–People are stupid (and selfish) for driving cars (dangerous, climate change)
–People are stupid for thinking it’s reasonable to live without a car (missed opportunity to get ahead)
Not me though, I consider everything from all sides all the time no matter what. Anyone that doesn’t invest their time like this to make decisions is… stupid. (/s)
lemmitor :“Everything I don’t like is political. If it’s something I like, then it’s not political, but just common sense and has been that way since the dawn of time.”
Three sexual orientations, straight, hot lesbians, and political.
Gundam: the Witch From Mercury went from hot lesbians to political lesbians when they showed no-room-for-theoretical-male-senpai commitment and exchange of friendship rings!wojak-nooo
Got to get the weebs excited about girls kissing but not scare them by the girls kissing actually loving each other enough for real commitment that leaves no room for an ego insert senpai wojak-nooo
Certain products use algorithms that predict you’re going to stop using it before you’re even aware. This can trigger things to sent you emails, etc with some perk.
Downvoted but reversals and dyslexia used to be thought of as linked for a long time. These days, not so much, it’s just because they’re shit at writing (dysgraphia) and processing. They don’t even see the letters backwards.
Anecdotally, and perhaps ironically, they were right, I am dyslexic, and I definitely do perceive letters as permuted quite often. The second link really chuffs me because it’s clearly a non-dyslexic person openly speculating as if they’re authoritative, but this theory of “3d processing” words jives with neither other literature about dyslexia, nor my own experience. I’m pretty sure this is just someone showerthinking about a disorder. The errors I make are pretty incompatible with seeing whole words from the wrong “angle”; letters are switched, sometimes even between adjacent words (I might see “angle” as “angel”, or “and rain” as “an drain”), similar graphs are misread as each other (the classic example is [b / d / p / q], sometimes also g depending on font; [w / m / E], [e / a], [T / L], so on), words can be entirely displaced elsewhere in a sentence…
So yes, like, I definitely do see some letters backwards or upside down or mirrored, etc.
Mostly, I was trying to be funny. It did occur to me as a possibility, but I didn’t comment it in a serious way. I was diagnosed with dyslexia as a kid, but don’t seem to have that problem anymore. Either way, I have no idea where the original or any interpretation of it comes from.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.