this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2025
132 points (79.2% liked)

Memes

53439 readers
950 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] atopi@piefed.blahaj.zone 20 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Can people not understand definitions that are longer than 5 words?

I dont understand why people on lemmy are trying to remove the meaning of every specific word related to politics, leaving a million synonyms of the same general thing and no word for a specific ideology

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 33 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

that applies to imperialism too.

plenty of anarcho-libs out there claiming to hate capitalism, while repeating cia talking points about china, venezuela, and so on.

[–] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 23 points 4 days ago (2 children)

imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 19 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Imperialism has changed quite a bit from Lenin, such as the current development of one large empire and several vassal states under it benefitting from imperialism. Lenin's work is actually best translated as "current highest," not "highest." Economists like Cheng Enfu have developed theories of Neoimperialism, and Nkrumah with Neocolonialism.

[–] Weydemeyer@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I second this. I enjoyed reading Lenin’s Imperialism very much, but it also felt very dated (as it should, it’s well over 100 years old now). I can’t help but think that if Lenin were alive today, he’d agree. That doesn’t mean it’s not an incredibly important work that we can’t draw from today, but we should also understand how the world has changed since.

I haven’t read John Smith’s Imperialism in the 21st Century yet, but I’ve heard it’s a very good update.

[–] Obi@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

While I understand that it's statistically likely, I can't believe some people are actually named "John Smith" lol.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago

Imagine all the doubting stares when you introduce yourself as John Smith (in Poland it would be Jan Kowalski which is funnily enough both literal and contextual meaning) but you're really John Smith.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 days ago

Yep, Marxist-Leninists have been advancing our theory beyond Lenin. What Lenin laid out is still foundational for analyzing the imperialism of today, but we are no longer in the age of competing empires, but a dying mega-empire and the rise of the global south.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

and some can't seem to see it happening!

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 23 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Technically you can be an anticapitalist and still not a leftist. You could be one of those weirdo turbo conservative monarchists.

[–] Socialism_Everyday@reddthat.com 12 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It's not just weird, it's materially impossible. History doesnt move according to big ideas exclusively, the main driver of history is materialism. Feudalism gave way to capitalism not because someone conceptualized capitalism and made it become real, but because the historical development of feudalism led to the primitive accumulation process of capital, the progressive appearance of a bourgeois class, and this was accelerated by western imperialism and the exploitation of resources in the global south by European powers.

Once the accumulation of capital had taken place and the main economic driver of the economy had become capitalism, it was impossible to return to feudalism, capitalism became a historical necessity. A return to feudalism is simply unfeasible.

It's not just weird, it's materially impossible.

I was mainly talking about the people being weirdos. Every monarchist I've ever run into have been extreme oddballs.

[–] Oppopity@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago

That doesn't mean there aren't people who do believe we should return to feudalism though.

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Curse this ai slop. The fake crayon thing is really bugging me, like. Crack open a box and put a few hours in if you mean it, super accessible style

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 days ago (10 children)

There's absolutely no reason why this short, simplistic agitprop needs to be made in artisinal fashion from a Marxist perspective. Labor hours saved is valuable, and nobody is enjoying this agitprop from the perspective of artistic analysis. AI cannot replace art, but the insistence that every graphic regardless of use-case be made in artisinal fashion is reactionary.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sibshops@lemmy.myserv.one 18 points 4 days ago (3 children)

My head-cannon of the differences

US Socialist (social democrat) - Busses should be free for everyone.

US Liberal - Free bus passes only for poor people

US Right-wing - Let the free-market decide and somehow only allow US citizens to ride busses.

[–] folaht@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Oh!? Well this is my head-cannon of the diffences..

US Communists - Just buses? Are you kidding me? We need at least 50k km of highspeed rail, make rail travel free for all, even tourists! And seize all gigafactories and data centers to pay for it.

US Democratic Socialist - Let's do what Europe does* and provide free bus passes next to free healthcare.

US Progressive - Let the free-market decide for men. Free bus passes only for people of minoritized identities and only if the bus will combat climate change, so diesel buses are out of the question.

US Liberal - Let the free-market decide. Free bus passes if you can prove that you're using it to go to work.

US Right-wing - Rob the poor blind! Those who don't contribute to society, should be punished for it. And no buses. If you need a ride, buy a car. If you can't afford one, then get a job you filthy commie! Also, it's the rich that contribute to society, so it should be the poor who should pay the most taxes in order to help those who keep the US economy thriving.

US fascist - Transportation should be free for everyone, but especially for the native Americans. We believe in the power of the native Americans. And this all the fault of the rich. So kill the rich, kill the rich, kill the rich.....Juice! Buses are part of their (((globalist elite))) agenda, the agenda of "you will own nothing and be happy". Look up who runs the WEF. Pay good attention to their ((( affiliations ))). So let us native Americans, who speak English and aren't brown, unite against the Khazarian (((billionaires))) and their brown globalist allies. We should provide free bus passes for non-native Americans however, under the condition that they're run by ICE and only with destinations outside of the US.


  • Very few countries in the EU provide free bus passes, so this group would actually be more to the left than EU social democrats and more close to EU socialist parties.
[–] astutemural@midwest.social 1 points 2 days ago
[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 17 points 4 days ago

The free market will decide it's actually more profitable to shut down bus service entirely and pivot to helping ICE transport bus loads of "illegal immigrants".

[–] IndieGoblin@lemmy.4d2.org 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Every time i hear an American say anything about social democrat they are just describing a normal liberal policy.

[–] Sibshops@lemmy.myserv.one 3 points 3 days ago

It's super frustrating to talk about because the word "liberal" without any qualifiers can mean so many different things depending on the context.

[–] deforestgump@hexbear.net 14 points 4 days ago

Future "don't make me tap the sign" material

load more comments
view more: next ›