• humbletightband@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    But the times are not tougher by themselves, they become tougher because of capitalism itself. So it was Homelander all along

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          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…

          • kaffiene@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            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

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              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.

              • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                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.

                • samus12345@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Yeah, but for the purpose of looking at stable governments in cities, hunter-gather societies aren’t a helpful comparison.

                • kaffiene@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Good points but my question is more about governments that work at the scale of a nation state.

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              There are a lot of capitalist countries that haven’t collapsed yet. We’ll need longer than our lifetimes to see proof that it can never work.

              But I suspect that people in power just aren’t good enough to keep it from going bad eventually.

              • daltotron@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                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.

    • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      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

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    From the peanut gallery, aka me… Most business are run under a more fascist principle.

    I’m not talking about how the business operates in the market, or whatever… I’m talking about internal organizational behaviour.

    Things are often very “my way or the highway”, with management, owners, etc.

    Of course, not all businesses, but most follow some fairly fascist ideologies. They’ll tell you where to be, what to bring, what to do, when to stop… And hey, where are your papers? … I mean… Where is your company issued identification card?

    They’ll watch what you’re doing, monitor and surveil you as much as they are legally allowed, govern every moment that they can, of every day you’re working there.

    Capitalism and the pursuit of profit is their objective, the governance is fascist.

    Business leaders engage in fascism.

    … Why are we surprised that this brain rot is leaking out into actual politics? Trump is literally known for running businesses… Mostly into the ground/bankruptcy, but still. His whole thing is him being the boss. The ruler and Lord dictator over his tiny island. How are we so surprised that he’s a fascist? Shocked picachu

    The best move the Nazis made was convincing everyone that yeah, the Nazis lost and are gone forever… They’re literally hiding in plain sight.

    • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It should be of little surprise (and much more widespread knowledge) that just about everyone with money in the 1930s financially supported the actual Nazi party, including but not limited to Henry Ford and George W Bush’s grandfather.

      I actually disagree with the meme; capitalism is always fascism, just sometimes has a better PR team.

      • Eylrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        sometimes with a better PR team

        Which is a big thing in The Boys. The company and The Seven™ are all about that PR.

    • Eylrid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Businesses use feudalism, with the monarch (CEO), court (board), and several levels of lords and vassals.

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Wasn’t fascism modelled after early feudalism?

        There were obvious differences, fascism has more nationalism and racism, IMO, but at the core, aren’t they extremely similar?

        I’m no expert on either. I just know enough to get myself into (and hopefully out of) trouble in these discussions.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      That’s not what fascism is. Fascism isn’t “when there are shitty strict rules”. In fact, classical fascism is a (failed) class collaborationist ideology where the state was supposed to mediate between interest groups of workers and bosses. protip: it didn’t. workers got screwed. (see corporatism, from the root word corpus, not corporation). Nazism didn’t do any of that but even they had their own garbage state-run labor front.

      But the point being, those business are beyond even fascism. It’s straight-up pure raw capitalist dictatorship.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    More like fascism is just what comes next after late stage capitalism if it makes it that far.

    Don’t worry, feudalism is still the end game.

    • Joe@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t see a decline in US capitalism or (US-style) imperialism anytime soon. It seems extremely well positioned to continue to be the #1 world power and influencer, even if its regional political and economic influence wanes a bit. US foreign policy is that of a bully in the sandpit who breaks any toy denied to him. Domestically, from the outside it looks like an absolute shitshow, with the masses cheering with hysteric enthusiasm as they are thrown one by one to the lions.

      • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Mate we’re extremely in debt trying to get Iraq and Iran to bend the knee like all the other countries we’ve imperialized and not only is it not working, it looks like its never going to work. In the 1950s we held 50% of the worlds wealth. Not only will there be a decline in the near future, the decline has been going on for 30 years

        • Joe@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The world economy is huge and growing, and the US economy is damn strong with a significant share of it. It also owns the world as far as raw military power and power projection goes. The US would absolutely use its huge military and economic advantages to keep its position as top dog if necessary. It is fine that the world’s economy is growing (inevitable after the devastation of ww2, which barely touched the US; also industrialization in countries like china), but it doesn’t mean the US is any weaker for it. And anyone who thinks the US won’t keep its rivals in check (no doubt leaving a trail of bloody corpses behind) has not been paying attention.

  • greencactus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Fun fact: The nowadays conservative (and IMO right leaning) German CDU has originally considered capitalism to be the reason for outbreak for WW2. They wanted to form a new Christian Socialism, which would’ve united Christian ideals with a socialistic (not marxistic) economy. The so-called Kölner Erklärung was written in 1945 as a basic idea for where Germany should head from perspective of the CDU.

    These ideas didn’t last for long and got replaced by a conservative fiscal policy. But it is good to keep in mind that even in the CDU there were people who recognized that capitalism ultimately has a strong tendency to fuel fascism. In Nazi Germany, the main capitalists worked closely with the NSDAP - Krupp, Bosch, Hugo Boss (who famously designed the Nazi uniforms), Volkswagen were all lead by rich capitalists who saw (and gained) profit by the actions of the Nazis. It makes me sad that even the SPD, the so-called Social Democratic Party, long forgot what it means to fight for socialism and equality, and instead embraces neoliberalism with a touch of social politics.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      It makes so much more fundamental sense for the followers of Jesus to embrace socialist values as opposed to the tendency of Christians to follow both conservative and capitalistic politics.

      I’m an atheist but I was raised Christian Catholic and the stark contrast between the religious texts and parables with the actions of the average Christian or the Church was a great contributor to my rejection of religion. I still see value in some of the teachings (be nice to others, people before material things) and always took them closer to socialism values than the Supply Side Jesus right-leaning Christians adopted.

      • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Same. I always wondered how ideas like giving what you can, loving thy neighbour, and forgiveness to the extreme somehow results in Supply Side Jesus, “Protestant work ethic”, jail time for addictions, “law and order” politics, etc…

        These people have strayed so far from the teachings and I’m not sure how they can claim to follow them and then blame homeless people for being homeless.

        • ours@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Exactly, like all religions anybody can dig into the texts and find a justification for their personal and political views but the Jesus I was brought up with, while I don’t believe he existed, had some pretty decent key points (forgiveness, love, sharing, empathy, charity…). These contrast strongly with the judgemental, conservative, nationalist, racist “Christians”.

          They would probably have hung this “rebellious, commie jew” themselves today if their much-awaited second coming had taken place.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 months ago

    I actually watches the first season of the boys recently. Killer show. Its stunning that any real person could have ever looked up to Homelander in any capacity.

  • Facebones@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    Dont forget the red scare whenever capitalism even thinks about faltering to remind us all of the evils of just giving hungry people food or letting them see a doctor.

  • MidsizedSedan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Dam, i fully slept on The Boys. Thoughts its just a Watchmen ‘supers in real life’ rip off. First season on par with Breaking Bad for me

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s just too fucking dark for me. I don’t dislike a gritty show necessarily but I couldn’t make it through more than the first few episodes. It seemed good, but damn I have plenty of problems and shittiness in my real life, I like my entertainment to make me feel better, not worse. 😀

      • Eylrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Same. I like dark stories as much as the next person, but it hit way too close to home with real world politics for me.

    • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s brilliant IMO (I haven’t seen the latest season but the one before … season 3 did feel like it was losing its way a bit).

      The thing with mainstream super hero stuff is that it seems to very much about supporting the status quo without really examining it. Generally, the MCU has been pretty guilty of this AFAICT. It’s also why Winter Soldier is probably the best MCU film IMO … Captain America becomes “the enemy” by standing up for his principles and destroys shield.

      The Boys is about examining the status quo and so stands out massively compared to all of the other mainstream superhero stuff.

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Who are you?”

    “I’m you if Batman didn’t have a ring what makes you a removed ass”

    • daltotron@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Depends on the writer. You get a superman DC writer, homelander probably gets treated like every other fascist superman beats up. If it’s a “the boys” writer, homelander probably uses kryptonite to rip superman in half in a graphic full-page spread or some shit. You’re also gonna be dealing with, are we dropping superman into the relatively hopeless universe of the boys, are we dropping homelander into the DC universe, where he’ll probably be right st home with like 30 different characters almost exactly like him, will we come up with some portal stuff, what’s going on there

      So I dunno, depends on the writer. Ke personally I’d prefer if superman won, cause it’s more hopeful and less garth ennis-y.

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    One’s an economic school of thought, the other a political one, so obviously you can have both at the same time or even working together. Coincidentally corporate business is mostly anti-fascist right now because social diversity and progressiveness is where the money’s at

    I can only guess you’ve used one of the words out of context. If it was fascism, I have nfi what the meme is trying to say by linking Superman to capitalism in the same way Homelander is easily linked with fascism.

    If the joke instead about fascism, then maybe something positive and relatable to it would make sense. Patriotism is what I think of since Superman loves America, but shows little concern for anyone else and this sentiment could start festering domestically, especially if the love for country becomes ultra-nationalistic.

    • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      There is a saying, something along the lines of ‘politics is the shadow that economics casts over society’. Now obviously there is no one to one correlation between a country’s economic and political systems, but rich people often respond to calls for economic reform by trying to make the public fight among themselves. Fascism is one possibility, ‘culture war’ is another, bread and circuses a third, and so on.

      • saltesc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Trying to think of that one time fascism was economically beneficial to capitalists… Nope. I can’t recall one.

        Edit: Oh, wait. If you were supplying a side against fascism, it’s always been very beneficial. I know that’s in contrast to the meme, but supports your point in a “round peg; square hole” kinda way.

          • saltesc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            You…literally just linked a list of suppliers to a regime. Which, of course, had to exist in order for the regime to be sustained. Which of course lost supply as the sustainability diminished.

            Do you know how many companies were passive or against it? It’s a little more… Quite a bit more. Millions(?) more. You’ve essentially just tried to correlated registered businesses with the entire economic school of Capitalism. “If it’s a registered business, it’s Capitalism, huuur.”

            Come on, I can think of better counter-points than that.

        • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Trying to think of that one time fascism was economically beneficial to capitalists… Nope. I can’t recall one.

          Almost all fascist politicians were supported by local elites who thought they could control them. Sometimes they could; sometimes the fascists got too strong to be controlled.

          • saltesc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            That’s the general recipe of ultra-nationalistic fascism, yes. You’re not making much of a point and you’re also disregarding all the other instances of fascism.

            A common thread being control, some times that can be through a local economical channel. That’s not immediately “Capitalism” and actually quite unrelated.

            • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              All fascism is nationalist. There’s no ‘other instance’. And a common theme in the rise of fascism is a compromise between the rich (capitalists, local gentry, etc.) and the fascist organisation, where the former bankrolls the latter in return for maintaining their economic and social position / backdoor deals / protection. Further, this usually happens as a result of some marginalised group - factory workers, serfs, women, etc. getting too uppity.

          • immutable@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I’ve been so sad to see the privatization of NASA. It feels very similar to me. SpaceX celebrating about launching a rocket into low earth orbit after spending billions in taxpayer money. How is this progress? We could do it back in the 60s with the equivalent computing power you can find in a $7 wristwatch today. Why didn’t we just keep building on our success, no we had to privatize, so that we could reach a beautiful end goal where space would not be for science and exploration funded by the people with its fruits improving humanity.

            No we all had to pull together so spacex can build a massive taxpayer funded toll booth and every time America would like to visit the stars some billionaires can collect their cut. And people cheer

            • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Now go check out how much each launch of the shuttle cost ($1.5 billion per flight) and compare it to the costs by SpaceX. The shuttle was launched 135 times, SpaceX has had more launches than that in the last 3 years. That tiny computer got us to the moon, but it wasn’t enough to make rockets or boosters be able to land or be reusable. And don’t bring up the farce of reusability of the shuttle. The number I recall from back when it was still flying was a 75% overhaul to get it flight ready.

              Elon may be an enormous asshole, but SpaceX has taken what they got from NASA and moved it to the point where they’re one of a handful of groups who could get us back to the moon, and doing better than any corporation on that front (China may surpass them, and Artemis only counts as a long-term concern if they can do more than 5 or 6 launches ever, which is not the current plan).

              • daltotron@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I mean arguably we could’ve done all of that with nasa if nasa had received a similar level of funding to SpaceX, but that’s kind of getting into alt-history.

                • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  NASA spent more than that on the Shuttle program alone, and we got 135 launches and a dozen dead astronauts, so that is demonstrably false.

                  NASA is great, and did a lot of great things. We also got a lot of great technology (and some questionable shoes) because of it. But NASA suffers from the same thing Blue Origin does, bureaucracy and a top-down attitude with respect to developing technology. (They also suffered from a lot of government pork.) It’s a good system for developing new things from scratch with a clear goal, but it rarely works well for taking existing technology and wringing the most effectiveness you can out of it.

                  Besides all this, the shuttle program suffered from ties to the military, which put in expensive requirements that didn’t help the whole thing, either.

                  If NASA got out of the rocket launching business and contracted out that part of their mandate to others, they would have a lot more money to spend on other things, such as research, both pure and practical.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes, which is why it is important to protect communist projects from capitalist backed coups, like the presidential coup that illegally and undemocratically dissolved the USSR

      • RidderSport@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Quite funny of you to mention undemocratic in the context of the USSR, as if it had been a democracy even one day of its existence. And about illegal, most of the times a country and its constitution is absolved its technically illegal. I can only think of the German constitution that actually has clauses on how to legally phase it out.

        • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          There was a fucking referendum where people voted for not dissolving the Union and it was ignored. It can’t go more undemocratic than that.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          as if it had been a democracy even one day of its existence

          It was literally a democracy for its entire existence. Now, during the last couple decades it wasn’t as democratic as proletarian democracies like Cuba Vietnam and China, but it was still more democratic than bourgeois “democracies”

          And about illegal, most of the times a country and its constitution is absolved its technically illegal.

          Okay but was it good that the Russian president ordered tanks to bombard the Soviet parliament building until the parliament surrendered? Is that your take? Even when it led to the installation of “bourgeois” democracies and a humanitarian crisis not seen outside of war?

          Just now the nations which made up the USSR are meeting old life expectancy metrics. And that is uneven, some of them still haven’t, some of them are doing better.

          Also LOL you are German, you’d know a thing about reducing Soviet life expectancy. Your nation killed more than 25 million Soviet citizens, 1/6 of the total population. Maybe you have an imperative to do some research on what Soviet democracy was from their perspective instead of regurgitating anticommunist shit out your mouth like a good little anti-communist German.

          • RidderSport@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Ah right so we go ad-hominum now? Frankly pretty low of you. Also it just sounds like a way to say that I am not allowed to have any differing opinion, simply because of my country’s past. Makes me want to find out where you’re from and tell you you’re not eligible to say anything because your country fucked up badly in the past.

            You expect me to believe that USSR votes weren’t rigged from the get-go? Next you tell me the GDR was an actual democracy. To be fair I actually didn’t know that there were elections, which in hindsight should be obvious considering that they had a parliament. They still had dictators of much the time

            As for the violence part, not that I am supporting that, but frankly it seems to be pretty much part of the Russian identity. It’s not like the USSR was not to take a friendly approach to any kind of civil unrest at all.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Ah right so we go ad-hominum now? Frankly pretty low of you. Also it just sounds like a way to say that I am not allowed to have any differing opinion, simply because of my country’s past. Makes me want to find out where you’re from and tell you you’re not eligible to say anything because your country fucked up badly in the past.

              No, you are not personally responsible for your country being incredibly anticommunist. I know what my country has done in the past, it has happened to some of my ancestors and living family. Which is why I am skeptical of the things my country tells me about its opponents, as I am encouraging you to be by emphasizing to you what is in the political atmosphere you find yourself breathing.

              You expect me to believe that USSR votes weren’t rigged from the get-go?

              Do you have any evidence that they were?

              Next you tell me the GDR was an actual democracy.

              If was. And women and LGBT people lost a lot of rights during reunification. Not to mention the plundering of nationalized industry by the capitalist class, greatly decreasing the wealth of the rest of the country.

              I would suggest reading “why women had better sex under socialism, and other arguments for economic independence”

              To be fair I actually didn’t know that there were elections

              It takes a lot to admit this. I would suggest taking this as a moment to reflect on what you actually know vs what you think you know.

              They still had dictators of much the time

              Uh, no? Even during the height of WW2 Stalin still answered to a committee.

              As for the violence part, not that I am supporting that, but frankly it seems to be pretty much part of the Russian identity. It’s not like the USSR was not to take a friendly approach to any kind of civil unrest at all.

              Frankly this is kinda racist and beneath you from the moments of reflection I’ve seen in this interaction.

              • RidderSport@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Look I’d actually support socialism or at least strong social-capitalism. Just wanna make that clear.

                Arguing certain things worked way better during the GDR does not at all refute my point of it not being a democracy apart from on paper. Child care for one worked incomparably better than it now does. Privatisation and more importantly the dissolvement of companies did not go well and is certainly still a problem. Actually it caused neo-feudalism in parts of the former GDR.

                Stalin being officially reproachable does not actually mean he was reproachable. The kind of socialism the USSR practiced is in my opinion not all better than a well restricted capitalism. But to be fair, that is subjective and I am financially not in any kind of trouble.

                It was not meant to be racist, the history of violence in Russia since I am vaguely aware of its history, does speak of itself. Certainly in the years since the founding of the RF, has violence among the people and state-sanctioned been a common thing. The wide-spread unrestricted violence can be openly observed in Ukraine. If you look at any macro-violense theories you see my point proven. All and I mean all factors for mass-violence are fulfilled.

                Also if anything, my comment was xenophobic, racism is something different

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Hey, it looks like your heart is in the right place, I would really suggest you read a bit about participatory democracy and whole process people’s democracy (although the latter has a lot of misinfo about it) I would also try to understand the socialist argument from one party democracies and how they lead to more generative conflict (that is, collegeal onflict that genuinely resolves problems and addresses needs in a way that achieves democratic consensus)

                  I would also suggest reading some marx who talks a lot about how even regulated capitalism cannot function. I would not start with capital though.