• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle

  • You are mixing social democrats with democratic socialists.

    The origin and core of social democracy is clearly socialist and, in many cases, Marxist. Of course this was more and more deluted over time until today, were many social democratic parties have indeed completely abandoned their socialist roots even in theory.

    However, historically, social democracy overall can (and imo should) still be seen as reformist socialism, at least partially. The way I see it, it’s that the parties have abandoned social democracy by embracing neo-liberalism. have abandened those goals completely (e.g. modern German SPD, British Labour)

    One could also argue that social democratic parties pretty much always had a leftist wing and a liberal wing, this is true today as well for the most part.

    Its niceties are financed by imperial rent.

    Isn’t everything/anything existing under capitalism financed by imperial rent?

    How is it different to China, for example, who also participates in the global capitalist economy and benefits from it?

    When that flow contracts, the mask comes off.

    When has this happened? Do you have a specific example of a social democratic party turning fascist (actually curious)? Turning neo-liberal, sure, but to me at least, equating neo-liberalism with fascism is an oversimplification. Or is the argument that socdem turns into neo-liberalism, neo-liberalism turns into fascism, ergo socdem=fascism?

    >I explicitly said “helped,” not “solely responsible.” Multiple factors converged in 1933.

    Fair enough.

    they preserved the bourgeois state apparatus after 1918.

    they kept the reactionary judiciary, the imperial officer corps, and the bureaucratic machinery intact. They unleashed the Freikorps on the KPD.

    Whether or not you believe me, it does pain me to defend the SPD, but I guess I will still do it.

    They didn’t just preserve it, they were essential in building it. And that shouldn’t be surprising since in their view, socialism has to be build through a liberal democratic system instead of going straight from imperialist/monarchist to socialist.

    And yes, they did a lot of “ultra-pragmatic” and desperate moves to protect the liberal republic and what was in their view the way towards socialism in the future and avoid a civil war/reversal of their gains. This does include them using Freikorps, which is imo indefensible, but it is at least somewhat explainable given the uncertainity of the situation.

    And it’s easy to judge in hindsight, but the German situation was quite different from Russia. There were uprisings all over the place, socialist republics were declared, but it was much more chaotic and the working class was much more divided. Chances of right wing and monarchists forces reversing power or even taking back more power seemed plausable.

    >They refused every proposal for a united working class front against the Nazis.

    This is very critical and one of the biggest issues. But again, this was a mutual thing. The KPD also refused to form any kind of front against the nazis until it was too late. Both factions failed to see nazism/fascism severely underestimated the threat of the fascists.

    >Stalin characterized this relationship precisely when he stated that “Social-Democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism” and that these organizations “are not antipodes, they are twins.”

    And this characterization is in part what made it virtually impossible to form any kind of pragmatic alliance/front against the fascists and I honestly don’t understand what the purpose of this characterization is… Why would they work with the SPD against the fascists when the SPD was, in practice, fascist itself?

    social democracy functions as the left wing of counterrevolution.

    Social democracy is against revolution and pro reform. If that makes it fascist, literally everything and everyone except for revolutionary socialists are/were fascists. This worldview, imo, is shooting yourself in the foot. And I don’t understand why this view still seems to be held. Many have no issue with critial support of regimes/groups/factions for specific and pragmatic goals. And then we don’t live in Weihmar Germany anymore, there is virtually 0 revolutionary potential in the west, so what good does essentially turning virtually everyone into the enemy do?


  • socialdemocrats entire ideology is built upon “reforming” capitalism by implementing a welfare state to more evenly spread the profits of the super exploitation of the periphery.

    Technically, it’s built on the idea that a socialist society can be/should be reached gradually by participating in parliamentary liberal political system instead of overthrowing liberal society and implementing a “dictatorship of the proletariat”.

    At least that was what the original debate was about (“reform vs revolution”) that split the left apart. Since then, most social democrats have completely moved away from the idea of reaching a socialist society anytime soon (for various reasons).

    The meme is pointing out the unfortunate pattern of it almost always ending in a rightward shift

    The meme is clearly pointing out that “social democracy enjoyers” turn into fascists/Nazis once the economy declines. Or, if we keep OP’s caption in mind, the idea that social democrats are actually fascists “wearing a mask”.

    directly helped bring Hitler to power

    What helped Hitler seize power was not just the actions/inactions of the socdems and the economic collapse, but the deep split of the left overall, the ineffective political system and the relentless infighting to the point were socdems and communists saw eachother as equivalent or even a bigger threat than the fascists.


  • when that os claims perfect working with the same game of steam verison.

    But you aren’t using the steam version, you are using a cracked version…

    why does it not work if the drm is stripped?

    It would most likely work if you set it up correctly, but of course, you somehow expect it to run by sheer magic… Do you think the person who cracked it/removed drm just got it working by means of magic without any effort?

    The only reason why it works on windows is because someone else did the effort for you.



  • Has it?

    Yep.

    You added a lot of weasel words

    The point is that Trumps image can change, even for his core supporters… I obviously have no clue exactly how many of his supporters were dissilusioned, which is why I will use “weasel words” (aka estimates and guesses)…

    I hear a lot of “this will surely be the end of him”

    I doubt that there will ever be the “one thing” where everyone suddenly realises they have been duked… Obviously that’s not how it works…

    if martyr figures were that powerful

    Ever heard of George Floyd? Trayvon Martin? Eric Garner? Those people weren’t even influencial to the left wing as a movement when they were alive (unlike Kirk), yet they still fueled one of the biggest movements in recent years.

    start martyring themselves?

    Some people do that, but in order to be powerful, they have to have been killed by the enemy you want to mobilize people against… Which is why the right will do whatever they can to blame this on “the radical left”, no matter what.

    I don’t think Martyrs tend to be all that useful.

    I think you are incredibly wrong on this point.

    one less active propagandist

    Pretty insignificant considering the countless other right wing propagandists out there who do pretty much the same thing. Also, events like this have a tendency to inspire more propagandists and radicalize people.

    power vacuum and loss of leadership within turning point

    Possible, but again, tp is not THAT important. They have turned a significant part of the youth and have a likeminded regime in power that continues to concolidate power. And they can an will use this event to consolidate more.

    chilling effect on this sort of rhetoric

    That’s not gonna happen…

    impulsive and poorly planned ‘retaliations’ causing further damage

    Damage to whom? You don’t know because the potential results are unpredictable.

    reminding those ‘in power’ of their mortality

    Like Trump’s failed assassinations?


  • The “Epstein thing” is never going to have reprecussions

    It’s hard to tell, but it has disillusioned at least some of his supporters, showing that it is possible, at least for some people, to snap out of the cult. Obviously some will always support him, no matter what.

    it will take a lot of time and significant financial investment for someone else to fill that role.

    I don’t think it will hurt them in any significant way, maybe even the opposite. Kirk is still incredibly useful as a martyr figure and it’s not like he had much of an operational role. He was a propagandist and he will still be used to spread far right propaganda, even in his death.

    I understand that he was incredibly influencial, but that’s mostly because he was a pioneer of the modern right who made the right wing cool to a younger audience, but his methods have since been adapted by many other right wing propagandists.

    Or can you explain why you think his assasination will weaken or harm the right? Because I don’t see it.


  • If it wasn’t this it was going to be something else.

    Trump isn’t invincible. Stuff like the Epstein thing actually seemed to hurt him. This is a very convenient distraction.

    At least this definitely solved a problem permanently.

    What problem is solved? Kirk was a very effective propagator, especially with younger people, but he’s not irreplaceable. And his death is already being used as very effective propaganda.

    A repeat of something like the doge employee assult could fix some issues

    Again, what issue is solved? I don’t understand what you think this achieves. The main effect stuff like this has is giving the right effective propaganda material and escalating violence. And the left is not in a position where escalating violence benefits the US, quite the opposite.

    there was never going to be enough capitulation

    I do not suggest capitulation or appeasement… But in order to resist effectively, you need stronger organization. This makes organizing way more difficult.


  • How? Why? This could have incredibly dangerous consequences. Didn’t Trump send the national guard after a dodge employee was beaten up? Only time how he will exploit this situation for further gaining power.

    Seriously, I’m shocked how nonchalant people are reacting. Further escalation of political violence is extremely dangerous for the left at the moment and could be extremely lucrative for the Trump regime, which is constantly testing the water on how far they can go in terms of seizing power.

    Don’t forget, it was also an assassination that was the trigger for the Kristallnacht. You hopefully are not quite at that stage, but it is events like this that moves you closer…


  • No I decide.

    Keep telling yourselve that, my friend.

    I’m minimum 12 weeks a year.

    It was 4-8 weeks when I asked you, now it’s 12 weeks minimum. Good for you.

    Have no interest in hiring you.

    Obviously I have no interest in a company as you work at, that’s my entire point…

    Look how you’re arguing about something you have no knowledge about.

    I’m telling you that this concept of “unlimited vacation days” sounds like, in my personal view, a shitty deal… As I told you, if you are happy with the deal, that’s great, no need to get so fucking defensive…

    Also pretty funny that you tell me about my work ethic despite not knowing me at all while complaining that I’m “arguing about something I have no knowledge about” 😂


  • If I don’t have my deliverables in then I would get terminated for performance.

    Right, so you don’t decide shit, your company decides.

    It allows me to take off as much as I want.

    Clearly it doesn’t, that’s the point…

    How much more time does someone need?

    In my opinion? At least 5-6 weeks a year, but guaranteed and enforced by law. More is a matter of negotiation. No paying it out (unless you resign), no saving it up for next year (apart from a few days), not counting holydays, illness and paternity.

    We also have 9 months of paternity leave as well.

    I don’t get why you keep writing as if you want to hire me… You don’t need to justfy your working conditions to me, if you are happy, good for you… I’m simply telling you that if it was me, I wouldn’t trust shit like “unlimited vacation days”…


  • aski3252@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlI hate the rich
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I decide.

    Oh please, then you could just “decide” to take every other month off and nobody would care, you would get paid the same,etc , you can’t tell me that’s the case…

    If you had read my comment, you’d see we are forced to take a eeek in July, two weeks for the end of the year

    Right, so 3 weeks vacation and you can’t even decide when to take them. Sounds like a pretty shitty deal to me…

    I take very little time off.

    It seems that way, yes, so what good does “unlimited vacation” do?

    I feel like I’m already off most the time.

    Are you a hiring agent or something? What’s next, are you going to tell me that your company is like “a family”?


  • Wait, so you get “unlimited” paid vacation days? That sounds like complete corporate bullshit to me… Who decideds when/if “work is done” or not? Even if your work isn’t done (there is always more to do), you still deserve vacation/days off.

    How many paid vacation days do people take on average a year? How many did you take this year/last year? What happens if your company decides that you have taken too many vacation days this year, will they mention it you want to discuss wages? What happens if someone doesn’t take a minimum number of vacation days a year, will they be forced to take them or will they get praise for being a “hard worker”?


  • Or just oligarch or power addict. In the eyes of most people, wealth is about luxury, material goods and fancy toys. Of course that’s part of it, but at a certain point, wealth is no longer about luxury and toys, it’s about power and having control over resources everyone else depends on.