this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
681 points (97.2% liked)

Leftism

2115 readers
1 users here now

Our goal is to be the one stop shop for leftism here at lemmy.world! We welcome anyone with beliefs ranging from SocDemocracy to Anarchism to post, discuss, and interact with our community. We are a democratic community, and as such, welcome metaposts that seek to amend the rules through consensus. Post articles, videos, questions, analysis and more. As long as it's leftist, it's welcome here!

Rules:

Posting Expectations:

Sister Communities:

!abolition@slrpnk.net !antiwork@lemmy.world !antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world !breadtube@lemmy.world !climate@slrpnk.net !fuckcars@lemmy.world !iwwunion@lemmy.ml !leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com !leftymusic@lemmy.world !privacy@lemmy.world !socialistra@midwest.social !solarpunk@slrpnk.net Solarpunk memes !therightcantmeme@midwest.social !thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world !vuvuzelaiphone@lemmy.world !workingclasscalendar@lemmy.world !workreform@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (17 children)

Again, it boils down to "define socialism".

Are we talking about USSR, Cuba and China-type socialism? Then they are all those things.

But if we're talking about Finland, Denmark Sweden and Norway-socialism, then I'm on board with socialism!

[–] coldy@lemmy.world 26 points 3 months ago (4 children)

The problem is that none of the countries you listed were ever socialist. Finland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway are just capitalist countries with good social policies.

And as much as their propagandists wish they did, the USSR, Cuba and China never got past the state capitalism part of establishing socialism.

There has never really been a socialist country in the world, it's a bit of a moot point to go like "I like this kind of socialism but not this kind" when nobody ever got to see it...

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

That's my point. Socialism developed a broad meaning as time went on. Before, it started to mean simply demanding better worker's rights and conditions. But evolved to mean businesses owned by workers. Eventually, communism came into the scene and started to promote stateless society run by the proletariat. Then with so many people being turned off by the violence of communism, the more moderate left-- social democrats-- advocated to implement socialism through political and electoral mobilisation. But even then, as time progressed, social democrats abandoned their attempts to implement wholesale socialism and instead rein capitalism with sweeping regulations, instead of abolishing capitalism. Nonetheless, even though social democracy still embraced capitalism, the ideology is still considered under the wide tent of socialism but further right to it.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

IIRC communism was the original Das Kapital version, and socialism came into being as "communism-lite" not really following Marx's ideal but giving some good things to workers

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The term socialism was first coined in 1832, way before Das Kapital has been published in 1866. But before Karl Marx, socialism as we know it wasn't something that is fully solid despite the term already being coined. During 1848 liberal revolution, there were some who participated who'd be considered "socialists", but they don't necessarily know what they want.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago

That's really cool! Thanks for the context I hadn't known about that broader current of socialist thinking

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)