this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
1219 points (97.0% liked)

Lefty Memes

4359 readers
463 users here now

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!

Rules

Version without spoilers

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.



  1. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Oh hey, also the same thing with environmental issues

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ericbomb@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (7 children)

No, it's presenting as the "primary" solution, which it is.

So start by throwing money at the problem, then see what's left.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

The meme literally says,

"How do we solve poverty"

Research: give poor people money

"Maybe with cheap canned food?"

Research: no, just give them money

"I have old clothes I hate now. I bet giving them away would help!"

Research: No...

"Budget lessons!"

Research: fuck you guys.

It literally says, "no, just give them money."

The reason why I'm hung up on this is because the meme is trying to be informative and funny at the same time but imo it misses the mark because it oversimplifies the issue. It's literally saying that you just give money to poor people and poverty goes away; but that's not how that works. It may help reduce poverty, but capitalists will just raise prices again and now you're back at square one.

Edit: expanded a sentence (in bold).

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

So it's best to leave the money where it is then?!? WTF? You think that corporations raise prices in order to prevent homeless people from buying their products? What kind of crazy logic is that?

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

No. What I'm saying is to do more than that. Why is this so fucking hard for people to understand? I feel like I'm going crazy.

In my experience, people take these things literally.

In my experience, there are people who unironically would read this and think, "oh, all we gotta do is give money and then it'll be fixed" and then get mad when it didn't work for everyone.

What am I missing here?

Edit: also,

You think that corporations raise prices in order to prevent homeless people from buying their products? What kind of crazy logic is that?

No. But they're going to hear the words, "[homeless will have] more money to spend [for necessities]" and then start salivating because they're greedy as fuck. Haven't we established that greed is the reason why prices keep getting raised?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You're missing that you yourself argued that giving poor people money would push prices up and wouldn't solve the problem, but charities are increasingly finding that no strings money is the most effective and fastest and surprisingly, cheapest way of getting people out of destitution and into accommodation, employment and reconnection with family.

So please stop saying that giving people money is somehow an ineffective way of dealing with extreme poverty. You're incorrect. It's very effective indeed.

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Firstly, I forgot that a lot of countries don't have the same level of greed as the US, but I'm arguing from an American perspective. Giving out money may legitimately work in other countries, but I think American executives are too greedy for something to work like that in the US at an official capacity without additional intervention. Secondly, I'm not trying to say that. I'm saying to do more than that because I believe that companies in the US are too greedy to allow it to "just work".

Money is great, but do more than that.

Money is great, but do more than that.

Money is great, but do more than that.

Like, how many times do I have to repeat myself?

Money is great, but do more than that.

Money is great, but do more than that.

Money is great, but do more than that.

Prices are increasing faster than inflation but wages have stagnated, yet you're saying that more money won't lead to people once again being priced out of life. That runs contrary to what is already going on.

You need to do things like cap rent, build public housing, make sure they can afford food even when CEOs are renting out pineapples, make sure they have transportation, make sure they have somewhere to live, and so on.

The US specifically runs on greed. If CEOs hear that everyone's going to be getting more money, then they're going to start charging more money because that's how the US works. Just giving out money may work for other countries, but the US is fucked as hell. Charities giving out money doesn't equate to everyone in need getting money which is why prices don't increase, companies don't know who to fleece; but if CEOs could find out who was getting the charity money, they'd absolutely try to charge them more. If everyone is getting money, then the CEOs will just fuck people over again to afford a new yacht.

And even then. Even then there will be people in very poor mental health who desperately need attention but they cannot afford mental health services. These people will not be able to function with money alone. These people need serious help. Money alone will not help these people.

The message I'm trying to convey is that you should have other things available to them if they need it; but you seem to be saying to just throw money at them and tell them to fuck off.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I never said you shouldn't do anything else, I only disagreed with you when you suggested that giving them money wouldn't help and that somehow giving homeless people money would be a driver for inflation, but homeless people eating isn't a driver for inflation.

  • Giving destitute people money does help. It helps a lot.
  • You can take people to a shrink and a physiotherapist and a doctor as much as you like, but if they don't have food and shelter it's going to do jack shit for their mental health, their physical health and their disease resistance.

Guess what's cheaper than hiring shrinks and physios and medics? Giving homeless people enough money to get food and shelter. Guess what doesn't help homeless people solve their problems? Keeping them on the street trying to scrape together enough cash each day to get into shelter for the night.

  • So yeah, once you've given them enough money to let them get themselves back into stable accommodation with enough food to eat they have the time to go looking for employment, so then you support them with that. That's when you can supply training, but for goodness sake don't take a homeless person to your employment training before giving them an address.
  • And yeah, once you've given them enough money to allow them to get themselves back into stable accommodation with enough food to eat and some independent employment, sure, enrol them in medicare.
  • And yeah, once you've given them enough money to allow them to get themselves back into stable accommodation with enough food to eat and some independent employment, and you enrolled them in medicare and they're having a normal life, guess whose mental health improved A LOT in six months?
  • So sure, yeah, get them a shrink once they have a life, but for goodness' sake, what kind of an idiot goes to a rough sleeper and says "if we can talk through some of the issues you have with your dad, I'm sure it'll seem a bit less cold at night here."?!

And can you please permanently get lost with the thinking that says that we NEED abject poverty and starving people and rough sleepers to keep prices low?! Seriously, shut up. It's not working. It never worked. The USA has some insane levels of inequality and it didn't keep prices low in the USA. It just doesn't. False. Crazy talk. Stop it. Wrong. No. Doesn't help. Never helped. The poorest people having money was NEVER the cause of inflation. Nope, it isn't, it won't be. Please don't come back with that shit again. Stop saying it because it's really very stupid indeed.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)