▲ 403 ▼ There is no pro capitalist left (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 month ago by cm0002@mander.xyz to c/actualsocialism@lemmy.dbzer0.com 91 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip -3 points 1 month ago (1 child) Have we not heard of liberals? permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thinkyfish@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago (1 child) liberals are right wing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) even democratic socialists? genuinely curious, trying to map your spectrum permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Democratic socialists are not capitalist, they're socialist. You're thinking of social democrats. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Kind of splitting hairs at this point, but if the defining feature of capitalism is the private ownership of business, then I'd say demsocs would still qualify as capitalists. But maybe we have different notions of capitalism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (1 child) Its not splitting hairs at all. Demsocs are straight up not capitalists. They believe in collective ownership, not private. You're confusing it for social democracy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Ah yeah my bad. I confused it for what we have/had in Europe, like nordic model type stuff. But I guess that's socdems then. You have to admit the naming is confusing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent [–] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago It's really not. Sure the naming might be confusing and basically a repetition of "Judeas Peoples Front". But the difference of ideology is rather noticeably large. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thinkyfish@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago (1 child) liberals are right wing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) even democratic socialists? genuinely curious, trying to map your spectrum permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Democratic socialists are not capitalist, they're socialist. You're thinking of social democrats. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Kind of splitting hairs at this point, but if the defining feature of capitalism is the private ownership of business, then I'd say demsocs would still qualify as capitalists. But maybe we have different notions of capitalism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (1 child) Its not splitting hairs at all. Demsocs are straight up not capitalists. They believe in collective ownership, not private. You're confusing it for social democracy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Ah yeah my bad. I confused it for what we have/had in Europe, like nordic model type stuff. But I guess that's socdems then. You have to admit the naming is confusing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent [–] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago It's really not. Sure the naming might be confusing and basically a repetition of "Judeas Peoples Front". But the difference of ideology is rather noticeably large. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 child) even democratic socialists? genuinely curious, trying to map your spectrum permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Democratic socialists are not capitalist, they're socialist. You're thinking of social democrats. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Kind of splitting hairs at this point, but if the defining feature of capitalism is the private ownership of business, then I'd say demsocs would still qualify as capitalists. But maybe we have different notions of capitalism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (1 child) Its not splitting hairs at all. Demsocs are straight up not capitalists. They believe in collective ownership, not private. You're confusing it for social democracy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Ah yeah my bad. I confused it for what we have/had in Europe, like nordic model type stuff. But I guess that's socdems then. You have to admit the naming is confusing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent [–] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago It's really not. Sure the naming might be confusing and basically a repetition of "Judeas Peoples Front". But the difference of ideology is rather noticeably large. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Democratic socialists are not capitalist, they're socialist. You're thinking of social democrats. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Kind of splitting hairs at this point, but if the defining feature of capitalism is the private ownership of business, then I'd say demsocs would still qualify as capitalists. But maybe we have different notions of capitalism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (1 child) Its not splitting hairs at all. Demsocs are straight up not capitalists. They believe in collective ownership, not private. You're confusing it for social democracy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Ah yeah my bad. I confused it for what we have/had in Europe, like nordic model type stuff. But I guess that's socdems then. You have to admit the naming is confusing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent [–] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago It's really not. Sure the naming might be confusing and basically a repetition of "Judeas Peoples Front". But the difference of ideology is rather noticeably large. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 point 1 month ago (2 children) Kind of splitting hairs at this point, but if the defining feature of capitalism is the private ownership of business, then I'd say demsocs would still qualify as capitalists. But maybe we have different notions of capitalism. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (1 child) Its not splitting hairs at all. Demsocs are straight up not capitalists. They believe in collective ownership, not private. You're confusing it for social democracy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Ah yeah my bad. I confused it for what we have/had in Europe, like nordic model type stuff. But I guess that's socdems then. You have to admit the naming is confusing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent [–] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago It's really not. Sure the naming might be confusing and basically a repetition of "Judeas Peoples Front". But the difference of ideology is rather noticeably large. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (1 child) Its not splitting hairs at all. Demsocs are straight up not capitalists. They believe in collective ownership, not private. You're confusing it for social democracy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Ah yeah my bad. I confused it for what we have/had in Europe, like nordic model type stuff. But I guess that's socdems then. You have to admit the naming is confusing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) Ah yeah my bad. I confused it for what we have/had in Europe, like nordic model type stuff. But I guess that's socdems then. You have to admit the naming is confusing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent
[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago It is, but that tends to happen in politics. The Nazi party was nominally a socialist worker's party permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Killercat103@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 month ago It's really not. Sure the naming might be confusing and basically a repetition of "Judeas Peoples Front". But the difference of ideology is rather noticeably large. permalink fedilink source parent