No problem, thanks for the crosspost! 🫡

Western countries have similar levels of surveilance and regulation. The firewall and VPN bit is true, but that’s not for privacy so much as it is the desire to build up their own internet that can’t be dominated by the US. They are very wary of how western countries used propaganda to destabilize the USSR with outlets like Radio Free Europe.

Revolutionary Socialism hasn’t failed catastrophically, there are still Socialist states and more are cropping up. And further, I already acknowledged that there’s no such thing as a “pure” system, Cuba for example has private property in a limited fashion. It’s still Socialist, because the large firms and key industries are public.

As for cooperatives, they aren’t anything in and of themselves. In the context of a Capitalist economy, they are a little cooperative bit of the overall Capitalist pie, they still rely on Capitalist infrastructure, Capitalist aquisition of raw materials, and consumers who gain their wages from Capitalist jobs. It’s certainly a better form of organization for those who can find or start one, but to give it the descriptor for a broad system is devoid of context.

Marxism absolutely isn’t rigid, it’s seen success in many countries and continues to get developed and iterated. This is why I say you haven’t actually engaged with Marx, your criticisms of Marxism are criticisms of a strawman. You could do with reading some of the works listed in the post body, I recommend Critique of the Gotha Programme, I think you’ll find it relevant.

I really don’t think you’ve engaged much with Marx if you think the fundamental distinctions between Capitalism and Socialism have changed to the point of calling systems thoroughly dominated by Private Property “more Socialist than Capitalist.” Marx called this Social Democracy “Conservative Socialism,” or “Bourgeois Socialism:”

A second and more practical, but less systematic, form of this Socialism sought to depreciate every revolutionary movement in the eyes of the working class, by showing that no mere political reform, but only a change in the material conditions of existence, in economical relations, could be of any advantage to them. By changes in the material conditions of existence, this form of Socialism, however, by no means understands abolition of the bourgeois relations of production, an abolition that can be effected only by a revolution, but administrative reforms, based on the continued existence of these relations; reforms, therefore, that in no respect affect the relations between capital and labour, but, at the best, lessen the cost, and simplify the administrative work, of bourgeois government.

His analysis is still on the nose for Social Democracy, where worker protections are sliding, and the system itself reliant on exploiting the Global South.

Having national bargaining agreements in an economy driven by Private Ownership of large firms and key industries does not make it more socialist than capitalist. It means labor organization is stronger than in other Capitalist countries, but the character of the economy is the same underneath. I wouldn’t call Marxist analysis “dumb and reactionary.”

The Richard Wolff Clip you’re referencing, in case anyone wandering in hasn’t seen it yet

When people speak of Capitalism and Socialism, they aren’t speaking of the Private and Public sectors. In the US, for example, the millitary is in the public sector, but its purpose is to extract vast profits in the private sector.

Instead, what matters is which aspect of society is the principle, ie which controls large firms, key industries, and the government. That’s why Cuba, despite having a private sector, is Socialist, while Scandinavia is Capitalist.

When people speak of Capitalism and Socialism, they aren’t speaking of the Private and Public sectors. In the US, for example, the millitary is in the public sector, but its purpose is to extract vast profits in the private sector.

Instead, what matters is which aspect of society is the principle, ie which controls large firms, key industries, and the government. That’s why Cuba, despite having a private sector, is Socialist, while Scandinavia is Capitalist.

There are examples in the link @[email protected] sent, or you can see the Lemmy.ml version, as it has more comments here.

There are quite a few of those over on the Lemmy.ml version of this post.

Capitalism and Feudalism are both examples of class societies, but are not the same. Both have had working and owning classes, but the nature of relation to production is different, thus the class mechanisms at play are different. Engels sums it up succinctly in questions 7-10 of Principles of Communism, but I’ll only copy 7 and 8, as they are more relevant here:

Question 7 : In what way does the proletarian differ from the slave?

Answer : The slave is sold once and for all; the proletarian must sell himself daily and hourly. The individual slave, the property of a single master, is already assured an existence, however wretched it may be, because of the master’s interest. The individual proletarian, the property, as it were, of the whole bourgeois class, which buys his labour only when someone has need of it, has no secure existence. This existence is assured only to the proletarian class as a whole. The slave is outside competition, the proletarian is in it and experiences all its vagaries. The slave counts as a thing, not as a member of civil society; the proletarian is recognized as a person, as a member of civil society. Thus, the slave can have a better existence than the proletarian, but the proletarian belongs to a higher stage of social development and himself stands on a higher level than the slave. The slave frees himself when, of all the relations of private property, he abolishes only the relation of slavery and thereby becomes a proletarian himself; the proletarian can free himself only by abolishing private property in general.

Question 8 : In what way does the proletarian differ from the serf?

Answer : The serf enjoys the possession and use of an instrument of production, a piece of land, in exchange for which he hands over a part of his product or performs labour. The proletarian works with the instruments of production of another for the account of this other, in exchange for a part of the product. The serf gives up, the proletarian receives. The serf has an assured existence, the proletarian has not. The serf is outside competition, the proletarian is in it. The serf frees himself either by running away to the town and there becoming a handicraftsman or by giving his landlord money instead of labour and products, thereby becoming a free tenant; or by driving his feudal lord away and himself becoming a proprietor, in short, by entering in one way or another into the owning class and into competition. The proletarian frees himself by abolishing competition, private property and all class differences.

Lemmy is designed around discussion, so that’s the driving factor.

About the same score as any Western country. Privacy isn’t really respected anywhere unless you force it yourself, too much money in big data.

As a boot lover, I just suffer through the heat, lmao.

I’d say follow @[email protected]’s comment for sandals/open top heels, but maybe see if you can find more breathable socks to wear! Some can be quite cooling.

It’s important to consider trends and trajectories, while countries like Ireland and whatnot may appear to satisfy a lot of these, they are also struggling with the same decaying Capitalist system and are being dragged down by US decay as well. Countries like China that are improving rapidly might be more worth considering.

No problem!

Not who you asked, but I figured I’d pitch in. Hexbear.net has a good amount of AnComs, as long as you aren’t sectarian against Marxists. It’s a left unity space, it’s where I have my other account. As a Marxist-Leninist, I find Hexbear is generally far more chill and less argumentative because there’s a 0 tolerance rule for transphobia, bigotry, liberalism, etc.

Lemmy.ml is far more argumentative due to being more broadly federated, and isn’t explicitly anti-Capitalist. I mainly stick here for outreach, not to have a good time or anything. You have more visibility sorting by all, and can access Hexbear from Lemmy.ml if you don’t want to make an account on HB, though you lose access to emojis and other HB specific features, like easily accessing the Megathreads for News, General chatting, etc.

You probably wouldn’t like Lemmygrad.ml, it’s explicitly Marxist-Leninist and is sectarian against Anarchists. I enjoy it, though I don’t have an account there. It’s accessible from Hexbear.net and Lemmy.ml.

lemmy.dbzer0 is more piracy focused, and has an Anarchist bent. It’s accessible from Hexbear.net and Lemmy.ml, but can’t access Lemmygrad.ml.

Slpnk.net is socialisty, focused on the Solarpunk aesthetic movement. It can’t access Hexbear or grad, but Lemmy.ml and dbzer0 are connected (I think dbzer0 is, at least).

My advice? Browse each locally for a week without making an account, see what sticks. There’s no downside to making an account or abandoning your old one, really.

You do mind Communists and Marxists, though, Hexbear and Grad have opinions and stances aligned with most major Communist orgs. If you’re going to have a problem with Marxists and Communists, then it makes more sense to honestly own up to that, rather than upholding the Ubisoft Marx from Assassin’s Creed as legitimate.

“Tankie” is just “pinko” or “commie” in the modern day, it’s just a pejorative for Communists. Further, all governments are authoritarian, all exert authority, what matters is which class is exerting its authority.

I don’t think it’s good advice to just say “be especially suspicious of those spooky Marxist commies!”

Pick an instance you like browsing locally, and use that, rather than trying to browse as much content as possible. Specialized and niche instances are often way more interesting.