An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.
If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.
Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!
0. Only post socialist memes
That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)
1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here
Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.
2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.
3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.
That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).
4. No Bigotry.
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.
(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)
6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.
Ever seen someone doing their "unskilled job" all their life? It's just fucking magic!
The truth is that capitalists hate skilled workers, because those workers have bargaining power. This is why they love the sort of automation which completely removes workers or thought from the equation, even if the ultimate solution is multiple times more expensive or less competent than before.
Nothing is more infuriating to a boss, than a worker that can talk back with experience.
Some jobs require more skill, and some workers are more skilled. You can't get around that fact. That doesn't mean anyone should be making poverty wages. I think it's fair though that workers are paid more for learning skills. That can be either though paying them more at work, or paying them while they are in education. Note I don't just mean free education, I mean actually giving them money to study. That's the only way to make paying skilled and unskilled workers the same a fair system.
I disagree. A skill is a skill. Some are more skilled than others IN THE SAME SKILL. You cannot objectively compare a different skill with another. If a skill required to do surgery is "more" than flipping a burger, then being good at surgery means you are magically good at flipping burgers, but that is not the case.
It's "more" in the sense that I learned how to flip burgers in a day. Can't say I can learn to do surgery in a day.
Then I suggest using the word more valuable skill than being more skilled. More valuable skill since it implies rarity and not some sort of hierarchy. That's my take anyways from the word "some jobs require more skill".
Now you're just being pedantic.
Well, yeah. I guess it is because I am often jumping fields because otherwise it can get confusing when switching context (I am a mechatronics engineer, so a blend of mechanical, electrical, control system, and programming)
What does that have to do with being pedantic?
Habit from work
I don't think you know what pedantic means. Or unskilled.
From my understanding, pedantic is a pedant, which itself means "a person who is excessively concerned with minor details and rules". And aren't we debating the usage of words unskilled from the post? I agree that "unskilled" is inappropriate since it implies it doesn't require any skill at all. There are always skills involved. I also disagree if we call one job requires "more" skill than another. "More" implies that skills are hierarchial (at least to my understanding, because you can have more or less amount of something) whereas I think it is not. I think a skill is a skill, and what makes them distinct is how rare a skill is. Rarity however, doesn't imply having "more" skill. A person can be MORE SKILLED IN THE SAME SKILL. Not across different skill. Hence why I said surgery doesn't require MORE skill than burger flipping. They are distinct skill. If surgery requires MORE skill than burger flipping, then if a person is a good surgeon, he is a good burger flipper.
Dude, let it go and learn to say I was wrong thanks for correcting me.
Being wrong about being a pedant or on opinion? Also, the reply doesn't specify any correction, just stating that I don't know what being pedantic and unskilled is. And I do admit I am being pedantic from my understanding of pedantic, hence the current discussion. I do love to argue for the sake of arguing. I can learn a lot from arguing. So if people would like to debate me, feel free to do so. Please state what about my statement that is wrong?
You're not just being pedantic, you're also misinterpreting what people mean, probably deliberately. You're also ignoring the fact that some people have more skills than others.
Well, forgive my english then as it is not my native tongue if I really misinterpret something. And as I said, I think more skill implies skill has a level, not in difficulty mind you but in terms of proficiency. And yes, skill does have proficiency but you cannot compare those proficient in surgery to those that are proficient in flipping burgers. Someone can be more proficient at surgery than another, but to say a surgeon is more skilled with a burger flipper is just as wack in my opinion. Let's put it this way then, maybe the disparity is too big between surgeon and burger flipper. How about a software engineer and a surgeon? Which one is more skilled? See? It doesn't make sense as a concept. Even if learning it takes less effort and hurdles, you cannot compare different sets of skills.
My dude it's not about rarity. It's about how long it takes to acquire a skill, and what kind of aptitude you need to have, and how difficult it is. Also one person can have more skills total than another. You can't say that learning to flip burgers is as difficult and time consuming as learning how to do brain surgery. Are you nuts?
Yes, a person can have skill in both surgery and cooking. I do not dispute that. Even surgery is too broad as it contains a more specific skill set. But you cannot say that a surgeon is more skilled than a burger flipper. Then how about a surgeon and software engineer? Which one is more skilled? I hope you get my point this time
Some skills take longer to acquire. Much longer. Some require certain aptitudes. As you say you can be more skilled than another worker at the same job, because you have more experience, training, aptitude, or you just care more. How is paying them all the same in any way fair?
Oh yes and some people have a greater number of skills than others. How is that not being more skilled than another?
I am not saying we should pay them the same?
So you were just being pedantic then?
Yes, sorry
I think the big part of it is the required time it takes to be considered competent. Like for arguments sake lets throw out cost of education. The amount of time and effort it takes to be considered a competent surgan is hundreds of times longer than training a competent burger flipper.
Even with grilling there is different skill levels. A professional chef/smoker takes a long time to hone their art.
I think everyone should be paid a living wage, but when people throw trained professionals that require years of experience in with cashiers or fast food cooks it really subtracts from their argument.
We should be trying to elevate all jobs to a living wage while recognizing some jobs are just harder. Otherwise no one will listen.