• dartos@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah but capitalism also made reddit great, before making it terrible.

    There’s a balance in there somewhere. What we got ain’t it tho.

    • ProxyTheAwesome [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reddit was never great lmaoo

      It was a pedo networking tool reknowned worldwide for it’s jailbate and non-consensual creepshots. These moderators received awards from admins. Then it got too much attention and got a PR workover, burning a woman CEO at the stake to satiate the gamer-fascists before becoming a bland Atlanticist CIA sockpuppet front of bland corporate posts.

      At no point during this entire thing did it ever approach anything comparable to greatness

    • Bobby_DROP_TABLES [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is no balance though, the shit-ification that happened to Reddit is a necessary function of capitalism. What we saw as Reddit at its best was, from a capitalist’s perspective, Reddit at its worst. I’m sure you’ve noticed a similar process taking place in lots of other areas as well.

      • dartos@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I may be wrong, but I don’t see socialism and capitalism as hard opposites.

        I see capitalism and communism are like hard opposites with socialism somewhere in between.

        • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Capitalism is the state controlled by the capital owners with the workers repressed.

          Socialism is the state controlled by the workers with the capital owners repressed.

          They are literally hard opposites. One is a bourgeoise-state and the other is a proletarian-state.

          • dartos@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I learned that “capitalism” is an economic system, not a system of government.

            So you could have a socialist state that funds essentials like healthcare and transportation through taxes with a market (capitalist) economy.

            • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That’s not a socialist state. It’s a capitalist state with welfare. If the political structure of the state itself has not been reworked to put the workers in power what you’re describing is just a state where the bourgeoisie (who control power) have decided to do welfare, usually for their own benefit such as reducing revolutionary energy by providing the workers with concessions (the welfare state). That is social democracy.

              You do not have socialism without overthrowing the hierarchy that places the bourgeoisie as the ruling class:

              Capitalism = Capitalists in power. Proles repressed.

              Socialism = Proletariat in power. Capitalists repressed.

              Communism = No more classes, only 1 class because the bourgeoisie have been completely phased out.

              • wewbull@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                All of this sounds at odds with representative democracy. What political system would you see working with socialism as you describe it?

                • quarrk [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Representative “democracy” alienates the common man from the political process while maintaining a semblance of democracy. For this reason it is the ideal political form for capitalism, an economic system which alienates power from the masses and concentrates it in the hands of a few.

                  Class interests are the primary axis on which all political activity turns. Getting the working class to vote does not help them, it helps those in power.

                • very_poggers_gay [they/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What about the absolute lack of “representative democracy” we experience under capitalism?

                  I’d argue that the capitalist system is more at odds with representative democracy than other systems mentioned. Most workers have no say in what is produced, who produces it, how they are paid, how much products are sold for, etc. Instead, we end up with figurehead CEO’s and nameless investors making all of those decisions, and of course they do everything to minimize costs, maximize profits, and disempower workers so that they can collect billions of dollars at the expense of the workers who actually make their companies run. If we had representative democracy do you think we’d have billionaires?

                  • wewbull@feddit.uk
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Literally “whataboutism”.

                    I’m not interested in how the current system is broken. That’s obvious. What do you have in it’s place?