• SmallBear@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    In a functioning post-capitslist society, people should be expected to work if they are reasonably able. (I’m not sure if this is really even right wing but I know a lot of people who would say that it is).

    • Orcinus@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      You’re right, this isn’t right-wing, guaranteed employment is in socialist constitutions. The more of us working, the less we’ll individually have to. Contrast with, say, nazi Germany where they had relatively few people working many hours.

  • June@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    trans ppl should form an ethnostate in great britain and expel, enslave, and/or exterminate the cis population. all the property of the cis inhabitants should be confiscated without exception and distributed among the worthy members of the Party as well as soldiers who have been accorded honours for bravery

  • albigu@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    Definitely not my most rightwing view, but my most rightwing conscious position is that comrades should join and build up whatever organisations they can, even if they are right-deviationists or contain reactionary elements, and fight over those inside the organisations. This includes parties with settler, LGBT-phobic, misogynous among other deviations.

    I also have another view that may be seen as rightwing here (and is definitely controversial) that settler-colonialism is not the principal contradiction in current day USA, North America, or most of the rest of the Americas. It’s first between the international bourgeoisie (with home base in the US) and the international proletariat, then between peripheral nations and the imperial core finance, military and cultural sectors, and only after that it’s between oppressed minorities (be they native or “imported”) and the national state repression force. Some day I’ll take the time for this struggle session.

  • sushimvt@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    Comrades need to look presentable and dress normally when they are representing Marxism in a public form. Part of being a communist is appealing to everyday people. There is a reason why every successful communist movement, from the Panthers to the Bolsheviks, presented themselves well and professionally.

    This isn’t even really right-wing.

  • Sleepless One@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    For me, it’s stuff that I consciously realize is wrong but unconsciously and irrationally still believe in to some extent.

    I still believe in personal responsibility bootstrapping to an unreasonable degree. For example, I see obesity and drug use as personal moral failings that are wholly on the individual, and only the individual, to rectify – for myself anyway. I don’t wield it as a cudgel against others at least. Come to think of it, I think I mostly believe in this solely so I can be hard on myself.

    I also for some reason vacillate between reactionary Dawkins style anti-theism (extreme to the point where I’m convinced I’d crucify Jesus again if I ever met him) and being convinced that religiosity and spirituality are prerequisites to being a good person and that my inability to convince myself that god is real means I’m an ontologically evil subhuman.

    Also also I find it hard to resist my hard-wired programming to be a knee-jerk western chauvinist. A lot of my “unlimited genocide on the first world” style posting is partly to counteract this tendency within me with an opposite extreme. I guess growing up during the war on terror and never coming across opinions like “maybe all those people our government is bombing are human beings actually” until I’m an adult will do that to a person.

    • SlayGuevara@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      I still believe in personal responsibility bootstrapping to an unreasonable degree.

      Same, and that’s coming from someone who has been in the gutter himself. But I think that me getting out of it on my own causes thoughts like that because I also realize that systemic oppression and liberalism and whatnot play a huge part in keeping people down, so much so that bootstrapping alone isn’t helping that.

      I managed to get out of my shit due to 1) a lot of discipline and character and 2) let’s not kid myself, privilege. And I see so many people stuck in the shit at my job and I think to myself: man, if only you’d do this or that and things might improve. But that’s arrogant on my behalf, really. Like I know it all.

  • big_spoon@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    maybe that being a communist doesn’t require to be a militant atheist. Atheism is a method for some people to avoid reactionary traps that usually come with religion

    • I agree, I think a materialist perspective in the realm of political thought is key, but as for people’s personal lives they can believe what they wish about the nature of the universe outside of that. So long as the org is secular and people are applying a materialist philosophy in their analysis of the natural world here then it’s completely compatible

    • SlayGuevara@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      Out party consists of many religions and (so far) no problem has occurred. Not between the Muslims and the Christians, or even Muslims and LGBTQ+ community like so many libs like to go on about. Nothing. It can absolutely work when working towards socialism.

  • KrupskayaPraxis@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    I’m somewhat of an anti-natalist. I don’t think it’s necessarily smart to have children, only if you really want to but even then not too many.

    I think there are too many rules when it comes to things like alcohol and cigarettes because I think it is the responsibility of the person itself and not the government. But fuck cigarette and alcohol advertising though

    Lastly I don’t like it when people are too affectionate in public and think they should keep it to themselves

    • -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Agreed besides for the last point. I don’t mind holding hands and kisses on benches. I can see your point if you mean making out or further intimacy.

      Every person I know with a child does not regret having them. However, from an outside perspective, every person I know with a child has had to eat some form of major shit because of the fact they had a responsibility for that child. You are easier to control with a child. That is a simple fact.

      Either or not that is worth having a child in this current system is up to you and I don’t think anyone should be limited from having a child.

    • AmarkuntheGatherer@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      I hope you won’t mind my ultra moment here. I think while the results speak for themselves, he got lucky.

      Even in retrospect, Deng Xiaoping seems to be the rightmost someone can be and still reasonably be considered a communist. Looking at some of his unimplemented ideas and the policies that were reversed in the following decades, it’s understandable why someone would think he was a capitalist roader in his time. The path he set the CPC on meant that the party had to walk a difficult tightrope, fooling the westerners by obfuscating their long-term plans while keeping the creeping liberalism at check. Whole the capacity of her administrators and will of her people played the main part, China couldn’t have made it to today without fortune by their side.

      Tldr I agree but only with hindsight

      • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        I think while the results speak for themselves, he got lucky.

        It was a leap of faith and incredible trust in the future generations. If that went as market reforms did elswhere we would be now cursing him as second Gorbachev (or Gorbachev as second Deng). And the world could be as well completely doomed with no socialist China.

      • mathemachristian [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        isnt that true all the time though? i remember reading in john reeds book that what made the soldiers finally break for the october revolution was kerenski demanding and not asking. Up until then a lot were undecided and the revolution might have failed because the ones that were decided were stronger on kerenskis side? so much in life is up to chance that the best you can do is hedge your bets

      • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        I don’t think this is an ultra moment, so much as leaving out dialectics. Luck always factors into things, yeah, but the results speak for themselves because communist theory and practice works, and socialist projects continuously show this. The way they went about it could have gone wrong in a number of ways, sure, but so can working toward a revolution, so can the start of a revolution, so can the day to day mundanity of organizing a local party meeting, etc. It’s how you use the dialectical process to adapt to the shifting circumstances and predict outcomes that makes the difference. And of course the people themselves, the struggle they put into it every step of the way. But point being, Deng and whoever all agreed with his path were picking a path and trying it, and in some ways it worked and some ways it didn’t, and they have adjusted since. It’s that adjusting that is so pivotal.

        Or to put it another way, while luck is always a factor in things, analysis can usually reveal that there’s less luck than it might seem at a glance and sometimes it’s a matter of how deep you get into the factors in play. Casinos play on this all the time by having the appearance of handing over outcomes to luck, but in reality, being heavily weighted toward the “house winning.”

  • SlayGuevara@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    That if you move to another country you should be learning that language to the best of your capabilities. I work with a lot of foreigners and the amount of them that are incapable or simply unwilling to speak, in my case, Dutch is insanely high. I do think we as a society should invest more in schooling and developing both the native and the new language of course. But learn the fucking language. At least try.

    • Anomalocaris@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      a) languages are hard. but immersion helps

      b) I think the vast majority if expats won’t even consider learning the local language.

      • SlayGuevara@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        Languages is hard that’s true. An initiative our party took is the ‘festival of the mother tongue’ in which many different nationalities can showcase their language and local cuisine and whatnot. Really helps people think about language.

        Also, it turns out that further developing your native language can also help with learning a new language. Hence why I think it’s important to stimulate that as well though reading and stuff.

        • Anomalocaris@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          also the question is if there are programs to help people learn the local language, rather then demonising them for struggling

    • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      I don’t think fear is a good reason to be using the death penalty. Tho tbf, considering the topic question, it does sound pretty right-wing to be wanting to use fear as a tactic to control people.

      • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        i know deterrence doesn’t work for regular crime but maybe it does for white-collar crimes that are premeditated conspiracies and continuously reaffirmed by the perpetrators?

        • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          I mean, I’m not against state intervention in suppressing the capitalist class during the transition to where class doesn’t exist. That’s an important thing. I’m not even opposed to China’s handling of corruption, which sometimes involves death sentence as far as I know - I don’t know what reasoning they’re operating from and why they think that makes sense for them, so it wouldn’t make sense for me to weigh in on it.

          But as a general principle concept of promoting death penalty to “scare” “bad people”, I don’t see how it would accomplish anything on that alone. If regular people commit crimes in spite of scary repression when they are desperate enough, capitalists and the like no doubt will some of the time too because the inertia of their class circumstances drive them toward financial crimes. And fearing getting caught may deter some people some of the time, but it doesn’t address the inertia.

          I can however think of at least one other reason more directly practical that a socialist state might go for death penalty for some financial crimes. Which is, in dealing with imperialism along with concerns about internal reactionaries, there’s always the possibility that a corrupt figure who is influential enough / has strong enough ties can escape or get released later by some form of opposition and used further against the working class.

          • Comprehensive49@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            The difference is that capitalists aren’t desperate. They commit crimes just to make numbers get bigger. Just fining corporations for doing crimes doesn’t do anything, because then it just becomes a cost of doing business. You must attack the people in the corporations making the decisions to make money, and the death penalty is one of the tools for that.

            To understand the use of the death penalty, imagine how many worker hours a capitalist who steals a billion dollars takes away. Assuming the average US salary (~$66,000) and working lifespan (77.43 years - 20 yr childhood), they’ve stolen the entire life earnings of 264 Americans. These calcs look even worse for any non-U.S. country because the theft is usually done in the USD, but all the workers make a much less valuable currency.

            As of now, China mostly uses death sentence with reprieve for financial crimes, which means that if the sentenced person doesn’t commit another crime in a couple years, their sentence gets demoted to life sentence. Actual execution has only been used for extreme cases, such as Sichuan mining tycoon Liu Han, worth $6.4 billion, for his crime syndicate of gambling, loan sharking, illicit arms trading, contract killing, and actual lethal shootings.[1]


            1. https://time.com/3700907/liu-han-execution-china/ ↩︎

  • Xavienth@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    I believe in the death penalty as a security measure, but not as punishment, at least in theory.

    In practice, the cost to society to ensure absolute certainty in guilt almost always far outweighs the security gain, so it doesn’t make sense. Maybe once a century.

  • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    There should be substantial financial and social help given to families that want to have children, and they should get more help the more children they have.

    (But to balance that out with a left wing policy, i also want free contraception for everyone who doesn’t want children.)

    • Comprehensive49@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Definitely. I hope China will be the first country to find a good solution to the birth crisis faced by all developed countries, since no capitalist country has found a solution yet. Reducing working hours, providing social support, increasing household wealth and living standards, and decreasing stress from raising kids should hopefully fix this.

    • An_ominous_mist@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      this 100%. We had a kid during the lock downs our government was paying everyone to stay inside. me and my partner got to stay in and focus on being parents, taking our time and doing a much better job then if we had to worry about making rent and feeding us on minimum wage.

        • An_ominous_mist@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          it was really great for the most part. the covid lock down part kinda sucked but the rest was great and it really shifted my perspective on a lot of things. the main one being having a kid isn’t actually the hard part about having a kid, capitalism is the hard part of having a kid, we just got to focus on what’s important instead of making money to keep us alive.