this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
1428 points (93.2% liked)

Memes

45636 readers
1447 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 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

You're mistaken, the state is a collection of proletariat meaning you are a part of the state. You may not be the whole state but it is your land as it is everyone elses

Atleast as far as I understand it

[–] Sharpiemarker@feddit.de 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thank you for the correction sharkfucker420

[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I've heard same said about liberal democracy too. "State is made up of us voting citizens" etc etc. Feels as hollow

[–] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The difference is that liberal democracy is underpinned on the idea that being able to elect a bourgeoise representative is all you need to be fully involved, whereas a socialist system must recognize that collective ownership of a state by the people requires the people have power over everything that happens in that state, law, economics, religion, war, everything. Socialist states exist with this as an ideal and only walk back from this goal with good cause, as opposed to starting with nothing, adding the opportunity to choose bourgeoise representation out of a small pool every once in a while, and calling it good.

e: added text in italics for clarity

[–] RedBaronHarkonnen@lemm.ee -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Making laws about what people think is called tyranny, not socialism.

[–] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at, can you elaborate? I'm not advocating making laws about what people are allowed to think, but I'm not sure that's what you mean

[–] RedBaronHarkonnen@lemm.ee -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

socialist system must recognize that collective ownership of a state requires power over everything that happens in that state, law, economics, religion, war, everything.

That's making laws about what people think. That is not socialism but tyranny.

[–] purahna@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sorry, I think this is just a grammatical confusion, let me fix it:

socialist system must recognize that collective ownership of a state by the people requires the people have power over everything that happens in that state, law, economics, religion, war, everything.

I'll go edit the original comment for clarity

[–] RedBaronHarkonnen@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

the people have* power over everything that happens in that state, law, economics, religion, war, everything.

Misinformation. Socialism does not require people to get involved in each other's religious activities.

Do you believe you should have a say over what I do or do not believe?

If you do, I disagree.

Your words support the criminalization of abortion on religious grounds.

Letting government into people's religious practices is asking for a lot of trouble, and I have a feeling that you'd be just as bothered by it as me.