Cowbee

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Pumped Up Kicks is explicit satire, not an actual call for school shootings.

Let me ask this: what makes more sense, a random, specifically Japanese group of people, enjoys northern European Neo-Nazi music for the tunes? Or, perhaps, the fact that Japan has legitimate fascist movements, and historical ties to fascism without heavily denouncing them like Germany, means fascists are likely to search out more fascist music?

I understand your point, but it's incredibly hard to just randomly stumble upon fascist music and enjoy it for the vibes. This is a specific level of dedication in a country with higher than normal levels of support for fascism.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Japan literally has rising fascist movements that want to bring back Imperial Japan, I think it's fair to say that they know what they're listening to.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This might surprise you, but Japan has very close ties with fascism. Ever seen the Japanese flag with the rays coming from the center red sun? That's the flag of Imperial Japan, a fascist terror that scarred much of Asia. Japan refuses to denounce their war crimes, and there are an unfortunate number of reactionary fascists who use the flag of Imperial Japan as a symbol they support.

I'm absolutely not saying that every Japanese person is a fascist, not even close. I am, however, saying that I'm fairly confident that these particular Japanese fans are aware of the Nazi ideology of the bands they listen to, and listen precisely because of that.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I certainly wouldn't listen to Neo-Nazi music no matter how nice the tunes are, because I personally couldn't stand supporting literal fucking Nazis and listening to Nazi bullshit.

It's not like the Nazis are the only ones making music, there are countless good, leftist bands out there. There aren't slim pickings, there are oceans of good music out there.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

No, in a real free market the banks would lobby to be bailed out. Removing even more regulation from it would result in more lobbying. Even with anti-corruption measures, without worker ownership or massive Unionization, eventually these protections will slide back once someone more opportunistic takes office.

Worker Ownerhship and decentralization are the correct path, rather than antidemocratic Capitalist production.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Because the Workers aren't competing, they don't give a shit. The Capitalists are competing for an even larger share of the pie. Instead of everyone cooperating, you fragment everyone into companies, which are like little factions.

Some factions doing well enough to create new kings like Bezos or Musk is also not a feature, given that there's no democratic control.

Really not sure what you're getting at. Why are you even on a platform rejecting Capitslism, rather than Reddit, if you're so sure that leftism is a bad thing?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

Political systems don't determine quality of life nearly as much as development.

Your second point isn't correct, anyone could be voted on. They couldn't vote on the next level, only their representative could. I'm not sure where you get this new idea from.

If you're talking about the Politburo, yes, and that's part of my problem with it. But, at the local level, you voted on whoever you wanted, then your rep votes on who they want, and so forth. There were lots of shady deals that solidified power higher up, yes, but the process was Democratic in nature, even if highly flawed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Fallout 4 was even worse, that's kind of a point I raise, that Bethesda has been riding the coattails of better lore. There are dumb fetch quests in every Bethesda game.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (6 children)

... what do you think Communism is? It's a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society achieved via abolition of Private Property. That doesn't mean everyone suddenly becomes hippies working in communes or tribes.

Capitalism certainly can have cooperation, it just happens to encourage competition, monopoly, and exploitation of Workers for the sake of profit.

What's your point, exactly?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (8 children)

The Germans working under codetermination also have it far better than Germans under the Kaiser. Comparing a 21st century first world developed nation with a 20th century developing country sure is a win, I guess?

Secondly, although the beurocracy was incredibly corrupt, the Soviet Democracy by which local Soviets reported to higher Soviets that reported to higher Soviets was fundamentally democratic, even if flawed.

I don't really think you've said much of anything. The Soviet form of Democracy was indeed flawed, but it was still Democratic, and I think it's obvious to anyone that living in a modern developed country would be better than living in a developing country from last century.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago
  1. Kind of. The market can have Capitalist entities and Socialist entities, but the market itself isn't Capitalist.

  2. Not necessarily. Co-operatives are more difficult to start in a predominantly Capitalist system, and Capitalist entities usually can exploit their workers more in order to gain temporary competitive advantage. I don't believe this is sufficient reasoning to value Capitalism over Socialist entities.

I'm not a Market Socialist, for clarification, as I do think there are issues. However, Capitalism isn't markets.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (10 children)

The Soviet Union was anti-trade union, and pro-Soviet, ie worker councils. The Soviet Union had numerous problems, especially with beaurocracy, but fundamentally it was a Worker state, owned and run by the Soviets, and thus can be considered Socialist (regardless of my personal issues with it).

There are several attempts at replicating some form of Worker Democracy in Capitalist countries, but ultimately short of ownership none of this functionally makes a massive difference. Definitely a step in the right direction, but without worker ownership it is more to appease workers and uphold Capitalism, than actually giving workers control.

Don't misunderstand this comment to say that codetermination is bad, it's good, just not as good as it could be.

view more: ‹ prev next ›