158
German Centrists Are Smearing Die Linke as Antisemites
(jacobin.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2026
158 points (97.6% liked)
World News
58186 readers
1912 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
That’s exactly what the centrists are doing here in Sweden too. The left grew a decent chunk this election and the centre refuses to cooperate.
Centrists will sooner cooperate with the far-right than with the left. That's where their true allegiances lie.
Oh, absolutely! I never really grasped why they call themselves the centre party because they're hyper capitalists. I guess it's because while they are hyper capitalists, they also care about the rural communities. Well... the exploitation of the rural communities.
The party leader for the longest time was this brilliant thinker
This is, to be fair not what she said. What she actually said was
I think the above image is a decent example of reductio ad absurdum. A quote from something she wrote in Göteborgsposten reads
Which, uh... is an absolutely wild thing to say about Atlas Shrugged.
I've never managed to read the entirety of Atlas Shrugged, it is a stodgy piece of literature, and mostly just serves as a vessel for Rand's sermons about her beliefs about society. A way to indoctrinate people into her cult.
The book makes so much sense when you realise who Ayn Rand is. She is a child of rich bourgeoisie parents, who lost their riches and had to flee their home due to war. She is the epitome of "temporarily embarrassed millionaire", a spoiled, scared refugee child, who knows that knew that she deserves better. She just never grew beyond the mindset of that scared girl whose entire known world collapsed around her.
The coolest and most thought provoking thing about Atlas Shrugged is the title. It's one banger of a title, really wasted on the work to which it is attached.
Sooo many criticisms of Atlas Shrugged! The irony is that Rand ended up being broke and living off the goodwill of others and social services - the same type of "socialism" that she advocated against for decades.
That's because in her worldview, she was morally good and so deserving of it. She was born rich, and then bad people took her family's money so she was, per her definition, what we now jokingly say "temporarily embarrassed millionaire."
She makes it super clear in her book that (morally) good people have money, the fact that they possess money means that they're (morally) good, equally so, good people are beautiful. You can't be a beautiful evil rich person, because if you're rich and beautiful you're automatically good.
It's a nonsensical idea, for obvious reasons, but that's ultimately what her objectivism idea was about.
Later in life she had a meltdown when her protege/almost-son-lover Nathaniel Branden rejected her sexual advances because he wasn't into her anymore. It became a whole big thing. She was the Ayn Rand, he had to be attracted to her because she was the face of objectivism, and good people are automatically attracted to other good people. Thus she cast him down because if he wasn't attracted to her he's not a good objectivist.
It's such a dumb cult.
Lol! This additional context is really adding spicy tea to my morning coffee.
It truly makes you question the intelligence (and sanity) of every person who says they like that book.
Honestly, I think most people who are big fans haven't read the book. Like I said, I haven't read the book fully. It's s t o d g y and I'd never begrudge anyone for not reading it.
Rand was very anti-homosexuality, which is kind of a stark contrast to how homoerotic the book is. There are also a lot of places where characters will enter a long speech, and this can last for dozens of pages. I think Galt's radio speech is like 70 pages long, it meanders and it repeats not just itself, but previous speeches as well. Then everybody claps.
Like it's not a good book. Hahaha.
Rather central to her plot is the great man theory. They're the proverbial Atlas that is shrugging. The core idea is "what if all the great men (capitalists) decided to just stop pushing the world forward." Her belief is that society is only functioning because rich beautiful good people are there to ensure it moves forward, and all those regular people, the pesky workers and whatnot need these rich people to lead them, because we're all dumb sheeple who can't possibly make good decisions.
So eventually all the great men decide that they're done answering to society, they build a secret town in the mountains in Colorado or something, and there they live in their objectivist utopia, where no one is given anything, all checks are paid and balanced (except in the cases where they're not), and the outside world just collapses into the stone age.
I think there are people out there who genuinely believe this, that rich men like Musk, Zuck, Amazonman, Gates, and whatnot are literally pushing the world forward. Traditionally our history does often teach that there were great men, visionaries, individuals with grand ideas or inventions, who swooped in and affected great change. Modern historians tend to reject this narrative because these people obviously didn't live in a vacuum, and oftentimes the contributions of those around them are overlooked.