this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
864 points (90.1% liked)

Lefty Memes

4202 readers
314 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, upvoting good contributions and downvoting those of low-quality!

Rules

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,

as well as 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.

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

(This is not a definitive list, the spirit of the other rules still counts! Eventual duplicates with other rules are for emphasis.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 7 points 5 months ago (13 children)

I don't see how anyone would be safe from thieves in anarchy.

[–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago
  1. Stealing, when it is done by most regular people is out of desperation. Decomodification of things necessary to live, and change in the socioeconomic system from a hierarchical one to a cooperative one would very likely lead to reduction in such crimes.
  2. I have a gun. (/s)
[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 5 months ago

You are misunderstanding why people become thieves in the first place, and how comparatively uncommon pure thievery is. The majority of theft is legal and is done in the name of capitalist profiteering. Not that break ins don't happen, nor that everyone will be a good person and accept a society of mutual aid.

Genuine theft will still occur. The consequences of something being stolen would not be the same within an anarchist society built on mutual aid. It is much easier to recover from theft when shelter, food, water, are all guaranteed things that you don't have to fret over. So the consequences will largely be interpersonal, grudges and disputes between people over less consequential things like valuables of some particular nature.

I am not of the opinion that violence of the community need be used on such a situation either. We aren't the police for Christ's sake. We can actually settle disputes in a proactive way that attempts to rectify the situation that precipitated the theft (maybe someone needs mental health help, maybe there are interpersonal issues) without kicking the shit out of anyone.

Violent crimes can be handled however the community sees fit. But things like theft or destroying someone's clothes should be handled proactively to ensure lasting solutions for everyone involved. Violence is a pretty bad deterrent for this kind of behavior.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 23 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The state doesn't keep you safe from thieves now. The police are a reactionary force that shows up after you've been robbed and then do nothing to help you. The most you get is a police report to refer your insurance company to, if your stolen belongings were insured.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

A very real risk of punishment by the state if you happen to get caught is what prevents theft. Your argument conveniently left that important part out and presented a straw man argument.

The rest of these comments talk about unenforced theft like white collar crimes and other class war-like theft. Which just reinforces the idea that only state-executed enforcement of law is actually any good at preventing theft.

[–] interrobang@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not needing to steal is what keeps most people from stealing, not fear of punishment.

[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Do you think the homeless and hungry are the only people who steal?

High end crime happens ALL the time, and it's not out of necessity, it's out of the human condition of greed. Theft happens more often by rich individuals than it does by poor.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 4 points 5 months ago

It's a good thing the state takes that "high end" crime as seriously as smoking weed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No rulers doesn't mean no rules

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 15 points 5 months ago (35 children)

Who has authority to enforce those rules? If no one, then how do you resolve disputes in a civil, yet binding fashion?

[–] Worx@lemmynsfw.com 15 points 5 months ago (2 children)

This is a big question, and the real answer is, "it's up to the community to decide". But I know that's not very satisfying despite being correct, so here's an example of how it could work.

The first step is to lower crime / anti-social behaviour. If everyone in the community is happy, there's less need for anti-social behaviour. Sharing food and pooling resources, helping your neighbour out, teaching children the value of working together, etc. Most people obey the rules and want to be good people but are driven to crime through desperate circumstances [citation needed, but it seems to be true in most of my daily face-to-face interactions].

However, there are always some people who do whatever they want regardless of the cost to others, and some people who specifically want to behave badly. It should be explained to these people why what they're doing is harmful and try to teach some empathy. The next step might be denying resources which aren't essential to life, so that they don't benefit from the community that they are harming. Finally, if they keep being anti-social, they can be imprisoned for the good of the community.

As it stands in my society, the police have a monopoly on legitimate violence. If you want someone physically restrained, it's up to the police to do so. One problem with this is that the police suck balls. In an anarchist society, the solution could be to have a police force that is made up of randomly selected citizens and rotated every few years. No-one gets to keep this position of authority for long, no-one gets to refuse except because of health reasons, and they are held strictly accountable to everyone else.

But honestly, I don't think the police will be needed often. You've probably seen examples of self-governing systems around you. Think of that one shitty neighbour that no-one likes. How often do you look after their plants when they're on holiday, go shopping for them when they're ill, lend a hand when they're doing some building work? The only way they get through life is because they use money to pay people who don't yet know how shitty they are. In a society without money (because money creates unjust hierarchy), a lot of their options for being shitty and still having a nice life are removed.

I hope you were asking your question seriously because I ended up saying quite a lot! This is something I'm quite passionate about as you can probably tell. The organisation that I volunteer with has a flat structure so it's also something that I have a lot of experience with in a smaller way

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 12 points 5 months ago (7 children)

I am being genuine in my arguments. Political discussions are no fun when the disingenuous trolls take over, even if my sarcastic nature leaks out and I come across that way sometimes.

The first step is to lower crime / anti-social behaviour. If everyone in the community is happy, there's less need for anti-social behaviour. Sharing food and pooling resources

That first step is a doozy. And is basically the step that every political system gets kind of stuck on. The goal is simple enough, but the actual "how" of getting it done, not to mention how to maintain it once you've achieved it, is enormously complex.

And the society without money thing I don't think is actually possible, unless you want to go back to a purely agrarian society. Money, at it's core is just a placeholder for resources to simplify bartering. The systems we've built around it are often fucked and can go, but money itself is just a useful tool.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I'm trying to set up an org like that myself currently. Any good advice?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (34 replies)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 14 points 5 months ago (10 children)

Theivery is a result of material needs unfulfilled, not some random genetic drive to go stealing.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] DarkenLM@kbin.social 9 points 5 months ago (5 children)

You are free to steal. And the rest of the community is free to beat the shit out of you.

[–] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 25 points 5 months ago (5 children)

If that's how it works, then a stable anarchist society is impossible. The first asshole that comes along with a bigger gun than everyone else will have it right back to a dictatorship.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The community will band against the dictator as much as the thief

[–] richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They most likely follow the dictator, at the very least to sate their blood thirst.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

Their "blood thirst" of not wanting thieves and murderers in their society? You realize that our current society is orders more "blood thirsty" than what we describe but only that you hide the violence through the police and the brutal wars and genocides against other nations?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago (4 children)

The free market will regulate itself! We’ll all have open and fair access

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)