• Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        Français
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s a Karl Marx idea..

        Note, the idea doesn’t support the idea of carry permits. Personally, dont have an issue with a hunting rifle or shotgun kept in a safe at home, but carry and especially cc permits are absolutely insane. You do not need a firearm that can be hidden for either home defence or hunting.

        • electrorocket@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          Français
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ok, thanks for telling me that it’s impossible for a violent criminal to ever threaten me in my house. Handguns are good for home defense because they are short range, and quick to aim, not because they are easy to hide.(That too, but to a lesser extent)

        • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          Français
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Colt didn’t call it the great equalizer for nothing. Imagine being a 90 lb woman facing rape or death by a 200 lb man. Don’t think for a second anything but a gun will allow her to save herself.

      • masquenox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        Français
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It was normalized in the US because white settlers always had to be ready to commit genocide against indigenous people or put down slave revolts - that’s what the 2nd amendment was really all about. In a socialist community, firearms will be necessary because there will always be nazis about (not to mention their ex-cop friends).

    • RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      Français
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think most communists would have a problem with people trading crops that they grow themselves. The problem comes in when someone hires employees to grow more crops for them, starts collecting profits, and grows the farm even bigger. All under the expectation that they own everything that their employees worked for. Cause that’s literally capitalism on a small scale.

      Of course it needs to be possible for multiple people to come together and start growing crops, but only as long as no single person can take over the entire operation. Leaders would be elected, and be given a somewhat higher salary to reflect the additional responsibility.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      Français
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You could have a personal garden, but to have a farm you’d have to obtain a lot of land. Then you’d have to make the land productive with either large and resource hungry machinery i.e. capital or you’d have to obtain and exploit the labor of farm workers to work by hand.

      • ciko22i3@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        Français
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What if i agree with some of my friends that we will join our yards to make one big field and work it together? We could also ask others for help and pay them for their work, the amount of money we both agree with.

          • ciko22i3@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            Français
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            but if some of my friends dont want to work it they can just sell me the land. And if we produce more food than we need we can sell it so we can buy other things we don’t produce. I dont understand why its wrong to own a farm.

            • spacewitch@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              Français
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Substance farming is different than owning a farm that exists by its own production of food and selling those produced goods at market price.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              Français
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Personal property is for personal use. That’s it.

              Once you start to accumulate surplus property then its very obviously not personal anymore. A person that doesn’t want a garden won’t have one to sell you, because they wouldn’t have one in the first place.

              Don’t think in terms of “right” and “wrong”. Think materially.

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  Français
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The democratically elected central committee, or some other process whereby everyone decides together what our fair share is.

              • ciko22i3@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                Français
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                what if their father left them the garden and they want to sell it to me? what if they want to move somewhere else and they decide to sell me their property?

                • Squizzy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  Français
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Inheritance is antithetical to meritocracy is the basis for generational wealth and capitalist dynasties.

                  Everything must go, use it lose it.

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  Français
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  A person who could actually assemble a farm through small land acquisitions through the power of friendship probably deserves it tbh

    • ghost_laptop@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Socialism is the stage previous to communism when there’s a State in which the proletariat is in power, the purpose of the State is to use its repressive forces by one class over the other to oppress them and keep them in place, capitalism (also called the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie) has the bourgeois as its ruling class and oppresses the proletariat, socialism (also called the dictatorship of the proletariat) utilizes the State to oppress the bourgeoisie until global socialism is achieved, on that point on class society is abolished and the State is dissolved. This late stage is what we call communism.

      • DreamButt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I did not realize we had a timelord in our presence. Thank you for informing us that for the remaining amount of human history life is equally as oppressive

  • Nano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    You just described healthcare system in soviet union. Instead of money vodka was used, as money was worthless, and there were no foods in grocery stores. Doctors were drunk and barley came to work. Communism just makes everything even more worse than it already is. There so many horror stories you don’t hear.

    • hairinmybellybutt@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      it was totalitarian, nobody wants a totalitarian state. communism and totalitarianism are different things

      why don’t you quote the homeless people in the US and the drug problems of philadelphia, the capitalism of south africa, and saudi arabia?

      we disagree, it’s okay.

  • yeather@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    L take, communism and socialism don’t work and never will. There’s a reason every communist or socialist country has failed or fallen back into capitalism for the masses and authoritarianism for the top.

    • Flinch@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      Français
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      “During the years of Stalin’s reign, the Soviet nation made dramatic gains in literacy, industrial wages, health care, and women’s rights. These accomplishments usually go unmentioned when the Stalinist era is discussed. To say that “socialism doesn’t work” is to overlook the fact that it did. In Eastern Europe, Russia, China, Mongolia, North Korea, and Cuba, revolutionary communism created a life for the mass of people that was far better than the wretched existence they had endured under feudal lords, military bosses, foreign colonizers, and Western capitalists. The end result was a dramatic improvement in living conditions for hundreds of millions of people on a scale never before or since witnessed in history.” Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism

      read a book you moronic dipshit, specifically this one ,[https://valleysunderground.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/blackshirts-and-reds-by-michael-parenti.pdf] , look it’s even free, you have 0 excuses to not educate yourself, you’re welcome

  • Tedesche@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How’s about a website that generates money, like Facebook or YouTube? Can you own that?

    What about products that designed to create ongoing streams of revenue, like a patent on an invention or a piece of art you can collect royalties from every time it is displayed? The USSR famously took ownership of Tetris away from its creator.

    Under communism, how does the stock market work? I’m not a big fan of it, but it’s pretty hard to imagine getting rid of it now that the global economy is pretty much dependent on it.

    Today, five countries exist that can be said to be communist: China, Russia, Vietnam, Laos, and Cuba. Of those five, none have achieved actual communism, and several have inarguably embraced capitalism to a great extent. All of them have essentially authoritarian governments. Which is unsurprising, since a dictatorship of the proletariat is central to the Marxist vision of how to create a communist society, and involves the creation of a single-party transitional government that forcibly suppresses all its critics and rivals.

    I’m not big into capitalism and I think we should implement plenty of socialist reforms, but I will never understand why some people on the Left—or anyone for that matter—think communism is what we should be striving for.

    • trot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Today, five countries exist that can be said to be communist: China, Russia”

      Tell me you have no idea what you are talking about without directly telling me you have no idea what you are talking about. In what way can today’s Russia “be said to be communist”, and how does its current, very explicitly anti-communist government, contribute to the point you are making?

    • hairinmybellybutt@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Those websites are highly capitalistic and never brought any innovation, all technologies related to the internet were researched by public money.

      Look into patent trolls. Patents are bad, publicly funded research is always better, but it doesn’t prevent people from spending money to do research, but it doesn’t entitle them for the profits.

      I’m not advocating FOR communism, I’m just trying to dispel myths.

      Socialism is soluble with capitalism.

      • jmshrv@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Never brought any innovation? VP9, AV1, zstd, GraphQL, React, and many more were made/contributed to by Google/Facebook specifically to improve those services. We benefit from this as they release these programs/formats.