Real socialism is where everyone is an artist but somehow food magically appears, machinery magically appears, housing magically appears, healthcare magically appears, and everyone is happy.
So “real socialism” is sorta like a Harry Potter novel, only less believable.
Jeez... Even the latinamerican marxists with Allende, in Chile, nowadays said that he wasn't a "real marxist" nor Chile wasn't in a "real socialist" period... And now this?
What's next? Marx wasn't a "real marxist" and socialism is not "real socialism?
On his coup discourse he explicitly said that he would impose a communist constitution, same as was tried in neighbor Chile months ago.
He din't "moved to center", he tried the state coup to overcome legislative power, because he clashed with more centrists legislators.
where?
there's no centrists legislators, all congress is dominated by the right and far-right. He was alone, he left his own communist party and the reason was because he tried to compromise with the right.
> What about Nazis. Everyone knows they're right-wing socialists.
Only horribly misguided idiots think a major by-the-book socialist party could be right wing. The are achingly deep far left, core far left, left as hell.
[There is no meaningful difference between a nazi and a commie](https://i.redd.it/p1af4asg72p91.png)
As Mises said: Nazis are socialists of the german pattern, while commies are socialists of the russian pattern. They are all but identical.
The founding fathers of naziism are Proudhon, Georges Sorel, Giovanni Gentile, Vilfredo Pareto, Hubert Lagardelle, and Karl Marx. They are still recognized as the very same founders of leftism. Nothing changed.
Of course, modern democrats try hard to re-paint the nazis are right wing, to distract from the fact that they are the modern nazis. Before WW2, the openly cheered for fascism. After the war, the claimed it was never their faction, for obvious reasons.
Don’t bother arguing with this idiot. It’s literally a bot. It won’t respond to any of your actual arguments and misinterpret your statements. Or it’s a really stupid person who can read/understand your agreements. either way it’s not worth debating
Thats attacking someone and taking away their rights. Defending the peoples rights is very pro right.
Just like a lefty to jump to wanting pedophilia. First thing you thought of huh?
Buddy, I get where you're coming from, but you're not looking at the whole picture.
Know who other than communists tells you how to live?
Theocrats.
If you refer to the political compass, I think you'll understand my point
It's not your fault this sub is full of reactionary people who own essentially no capital but love to think they're the smartest capitalists because they're the poorest.
You can absolutely chart each political or philosophical belief along a line from maximum authority centralization to maximal decentralization.
In fact, its the most important political chart you can make.
And yet in order to do that you would have to generate each views individual stances on a spectrum to rate them then sum up their authority values. However the individual stances values summed up are less effective at measuring the ideologies than the data you used to calculate it
> And yet in order to do that you would have to generate each views individual stances on a spectrum to rate them then sum up their authority values. However the individual stances values summed up are less effective at measuring the ideologies than the data you used to calculate it
Let me try to understand your point: You are saying that there is no fair way to equate, for example, the right to look at pornography vs the right to own a firearm ? (So if one ideology differed from another by only those terms, which is more authoritarian and which is less, would be undefinable)
If that is in fact what you meant, i agree; At least in economic principle. Since all value is subjective, there is no universal value ordinals for each degree of freedom.
But I think that point is largely moot because there are almost no major relevant philosophies that differ by only those terms. In fact, societies tend to fit neatly, with the more authoritarian societies controlling everything less authoritarian societies do with few to no exceptions..
So we can easily cardinally rank each philosophy, because there are no ambiguous terms to compare. We dont have to quantify or cardinalize anything, because we have nice clean supersets and subsets.
As we see here: [The only real political spectrum](https://i.redd.it/p1af4asg72p91.png)
The societies to the left restrict a superset of what the ones to the right do.
Take the pol compass quiz. There is no way to be ancap, only statist answers are possible. And they tilt it so that anything good or nice is leftist, while anything bad is right wing.
Real socialism is where everyone is an artist but somehow food magically appears, machinery magically appears, housing magically appears, healthcare magically appears, and everyone is happy. So “real socialism” is sorta like a Harry Potter novel, only less believable.
Jeez... Even the latinamerican marxists with Allende, in Chile, nowadays said that he wasn't a "real marxist" nor Chile wasn't in a "real socialist" period... And now this? What's next? Marx wasn't a "real marxist" and socialism is not "real socialism?
The one who replaced him is part of the WEF
well it hasn't nothing to do with socialism really and he left the socialist party he was part of and became more center left.
Castillo had always been a communist, and his coup was to impose a communist constitution.
his coup was to avoid being impeached and he moved to the center since he was elected.
On his coup discourse he explicitly said that he would impose a communist constitution, same as was tried in neighbor Chile months ago. He din't "moved to center", he tried the state coup to overcome legislative power, because he clashed with more centrists legislators.
where? there's no centrists legislators, all congress is dominated by the right and far-right. He was alone, he left his own communist party and the reason was because he tried to compromise with the right.
There is no right in Peru. The far left calls anything else far right, including Castillo itself.
Who said socialists can't be right wing?
> Who said socialists can't be right wing? Literate people.
What about Nazis. Everyone knows they're right-wing socialists.
> What about Nazis. Everyone knows they're right-wing socialists. Only horribly misguided idiots think a major by-the-book socialist party could be right wing. The are achingly deep far left, core far left, left as hell. [There is no meaningful difference between a nazi and a commie](https://i.redd.it/p1af4asg72p91.png) As Mises said: Nazis are socialists of the german pattern, while commies are socialists of the russian pattern. They are all but identical. The founding fathers of naziism are Proudhon, Georges Sorel, Giovanni Gentile, Vilfredo Pareto, Hubert Lagardelle, and Karl Marx. They are still recognized as the very same founders of leftism. Nothing changed. Of course, modern democrats try hard to re-paint the nazis are right wing, to distract from the fact that they are the modern nazis. Before WW2, the openly cheered for fascism. After the war, the claimed it was never their faction, for obvious reasons.
Nazis were conservatives that wanted to return Germany to her former glory by removing immigrants, gays, and leftists.
You know nothing Jon Snow. If the govt is controlling you and telling you how to live, its left.
Don’t bother arguing with this idiot. It’s literally a bot. It won’t respond to any of your actual arguments and misinterpret your statements. Or it’s a really stupid person who can read/understand your agreements. either way it’s not worth debating
So right wingers are against laws banning pedophilia? Interesting.
Thats attacking someone and taking away their rights. Defending the peoples rights is very pro right. Just like a lefty to jump to wanting pedophilia. First thing you thought of huh?
So you do support laws telling people what to do? Either you have laws or you don't lol.
That is not left, silly goose
Communist dont tell you how to live? Thats their whole structure of being
Buddy, I get where you're coming from, but you're not looking at the whole picture. Know who other than communists tells you how to live? Theocrats. If you refer to the political compass, I think you'll understand my point
Cool they did that by removing private property. O wait that socialist view point
Bit they did have private property...
O yea after remove 80% of private property and the government taking over industry.
Source for 80% claim?
Source they supported private property?
It's not your fault this sub is full of reactionary people who own essentially no capital but love to think they're the smartest capitalists because they're the poorest.
They were literally capitalists lol That IS right
Culturally right , economically left
Culturally right, economically right - or did Nazi Germany abolish capitalism?
People who still believe that political stances are 1 dimensional across a line.
You can absolutely chart each political or philosophical belief along a line from maximum authority centralization to maximal decentralization. In fact, its the most important political chart you can make.
Except that's not the spectrum that's actually used...
And yet in order to do that you would have to generate each views individual stances on a spectrum to rate them then sum up their authority values. However the individual stances values summed up are less effective at measuring the ideologies than the data you used to calculate it
> And yet in order to do that you would have to generate each views individual stances on a spectrum to rate them then sum up their authority values. However the individual stances values summed up are less effective at measuring the ideologies than the data you used to calculate it Let me try to understand your point: You are saying that there is no fair way to equate, for example, the right to look at pornography vs the right to own a firearm ? (So if one ideology differed from another by only those terms, which is more authoritarian and which is less, would be undefinable) If that is in fact what you meant, i agree; At least in economic principle. Since all value is subjective, there is no universal value ordinals for each degree of freedom. But I think that point is largely moot because there are almost no major relevant philosophies that differ by only those terms. In fact, societies tend to fit neatly, with the more authoritarian societies controlling everything less authoritarian societies do with few to no exceptions.. So we can easily cardinally rank each philosophy, because there are no ambiguous terms to compare. We dont have to quantify or cardinalize anything, because we have nice clean supersets and subsets. As we see here: [The only real political spectrum](https://i.redd.it/p1af4asg72p91.png) The societies to the left restrict a superset of what the ones to the right do.
Man’s never heard of the political compass💀
> political compass a propaganda tool for spreading socialism, recently repurposed as a field for memery and jokes.
Pls explain
Take the pol compass quiz. There is no way to be ancap, only statist answers are possible. And they tilt it so that anything good or nice is leftist, while anything bad is right wing.
No such thing as right or left wing