• PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m certainly overly reductive of politics. When we’re talking ideology, though, yeah I’m going back to my ethics. A government can’t act on our behalf with more rights than us - we just end up creating our master. Pragmatic actions, in the real world, are different from ideological conversations, though.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m somewhat confused by your separation of ideology from practical actions. That sounds internally inconsistent.

      I am willing to accept a state if it is necessary to suppress the bourgeoisie and their toadies, so long as that continues to be necessary. I would prefer we lived in a communist society but we can’t get there overnight and socialism is how you transition to it.

      • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s similar to your position. I just have a different path to a stateless, voluntary society. I also don’t really care what the economic system looks like, so long as human rights are recognized.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I also don’t really care what the economic system looks like, so long as human rights are recognized.

          What about human economic rights? What use does a homeless starving person have for the freedom of press?

          • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I consider freedom of the press to just be freedom of speech, which we all have.

            As for the homeless chap, it depends on their situation. I’d live in a community that would try to help them. I think we’re ethically obligated to help people in need as best we can, but I’m not comfortable using violence to force you to help them.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I consider freedom of the press to just be freedom of speech, which we all have.

              The thing is we don’t. There is no such thing as free speech, any speech that meaningfully threatens the government will be cracked down on. See Fred Hampton. Free speech is a legal fiction in our country.

              But my point is that the limited bourgeois privileges you get don’t matter if you’re starving on the street. You can’t meaningfully have those privileges without economic security.

              As for the homeless chap, it depends on their situation. I’d live in a community that would try to help them. I think we’re ethically obligated to help people in need as best we can, but I’m not comfortable using violence to force you to help them.

              So it is more violent to take food from a grocery store because that hurts the owners bottom line than it is to prevent a starving man from taking bread from a grocery store by kicking his ass and throwing him in a box? Is that your perspective on this issue?

              • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I meant that freedom of the press shouldn’t be limited to just people that work for CNN or whatever. I don’t think they’re separate rights. I didn’t mean to say they’re appropriately implemented.

                Theft of small amounts of food isn’t really something I care about. I’m not a fan of police or jails/prisons. We can handle these sorts of crimes more ethically. Robberies are a bit different. If you’re someone that visits San Francisco to bip cars then goes back home, you could prolly use a good kick or two if you’re caught by your intended victim.

                Regardless, I think we, as a society, should be there with the bread. It shouldn’t be an issue we have to face.

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Regardless, I think we, as a society, should be there with the bread. It shouldn’t be an issue we have to face.

                  But you don’t think we should use violence to enforce the idea, so how do you enforce the idea in the transition when former small business tyrants chafe at the idea of sharing? What if they don’t submit to nonviolent methods of control?

                  • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    They don’t have to submit? We do things the right way and don’t deal with those cunts. As a gradualist, though, I think we can build up our communities while removing the regulations that enable corporations to operate the way they do while staying profitable.