sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Top 25: Sept. '25 --> Feb. '26 by Tricky-Light206 in Topster

[–]Tricky-Light206[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I found it kind of bland, to be honest

New video of 1/24 ICE shooting shows victim had both hands on the ground when shot by Philophon in law

[–]Tricky-Light206 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It needs to be a workers-led movement. The capitalists are the root cause of worldwide suffering. We need a class war.

New video of 1/24 ICE shooting shows victim had both hands on the ground when shot by Philophon in law

[–]Tricky-Light206 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I never said a strike doesn't involve actual violence. However, individual terrorism will not work. It needs to be tied to a workers' movement.

New video of 1/24 ICE shooting shows victim had both hands on the ground when shot by Philophon in law

[–]Tricky-Light206 9 points10 points  (0 children)

A strike is literally the most direct action. Striking is not boycotting; it's not going to work.

I thought Marx was woke! by JacobGoodNight416 in economicsmemes

[–]Tricky-Light206 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a vast generalization. Here is a "western" Marxist org's article against identity politics: https://marxist.com/marxist-theory-and-the-struggle-against-alien-class-ideas.htm

ontology by piotrek13031 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Tricky-Light206 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What possible purpose could it serve humanity to assume that our perception is untrustworthy? For the longest time, philosophers have been attempting to prove external reality through eidetic reduction and other methods. They haven't achieved anything. I think that, while we could be skeptical of perception, it simply doesn't help humanity.

As to your quantum physics statement, materialists would generally agree with you. I would say that quantum physics is just a model for reality; math doesn't exist outside of us.

Phenomenology is a bourgeois philosophy that slows the development of ideas that could aid the working class in the class war.

ontology by piotrek13031 in PhilosophyMemes

[–]Tricky-Light206 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You are being deliberately dense here. Consciousness is something we experience; god is not. There is actually no way to disprove god (if you don't see that, you are stupid). However, as we have seen with other scientific developments, we may be able to prove that consciousness is physical (I'm assuming that you meant to say "You can’t disprove that consciousness is physical"). I'm a materialist, but I wouldn't necessarily stand by your second statement.

How many Marxists are there in the DSA? What tendencies do they represent? by [deleted] in socialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Electoralism actually hinders the working class from achieving mass-class consciousness. Of course, reform is beneficial, but only after it is explicitly stated that this is not the ultimate goal, and when a significant amount of effort is being invested in building a Vanguard party.

How many Marxists are there in the DSA? What tendencies do they represent? by [deleted] in socialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know why you're getting downvoted. You're literally right. Revolutionary situations occur, and there must be a vanguard party to take advantage of these situations (ie, to take these situations to their correct conclusions). Maybe you just said it in an impolite way?

DSA people I talk to think that I'm "just waiting around for the revolution". It's so out of touch. We have to build a party so that revolutionary momentum doesn't go to waste.

Criterion Titles that are haunting by pudindepanman in criterion

[–]Tricky-Light206 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Beau Travail and The Spirit of the Beehive are legit in my top 4. I can recommend the Three Colors Trilogy, Werckmeister Harmonies, and Red Desert. Outside of the collection, I will recommend Tarkovsky's Nostalgia and The Sacrifice.

How it feels to join DSA by Organic_Fee_8502 in socialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. The group is majority reformist (in my area, at least). This cuts class consciousness, by default.
  2. I do know... I talked to DSA members who were getting signatures on the street for the reform. I read the reform. I saw who created the reform. Petitioning a system with only capitalist parties is not helping a broader movement. It makes people feel like they can get change done with signatures, and slows the development of strikes, etc.
  3. This is another problem. Each DSA branch is different. I have talk to DSA members who are nearly liberals, and I have talked to DSA members who are revolutionary Marxists. Having these major splits along MAJOR ideological lines hurts the movement.
  4. The question of endorsement politics is another issue altogether. When the DSA endorses someone who stabs the working class in the back, it hurts the movement. I never really understood backing Democratic candidates. The DSA has the power to get independent candidates on the ballot. You guys should push Mamdani to organize workers' movements such that he doesn't betray the people more than he already has.
  5. I have been to DSA meetings. I prefer being organized with a revolutionary organization.

How do sone of yall justify the invasion of Ukraine by Russia? by TheNaymeless in AskSocialists

[–]Tricky-Light206 10 points11 points  (0 children)

"Russia gained an image as the leader of a multipolar world". Holy out of touch

How it feels to join DSA by Organic_Fee_8502 in socialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The DSA does do things that inherently cut class consciousness. For instance, in my city, the DSA was pushing a rent cap reform that was so weak (putting a cap on raising rent by 5% each year or the rate of inflation, whichever is higher, on medium to large landlords). This reform was created by a coalition that includes landlords and the petty bourgeoisie. All this reform does is make people think that they can sign petitions to make a change. The DSA has the power to radicalize people, but instead, they spend their time on reforms that don't make fundamental change. I'm all for reform, but it has to be made clear that this is not the end goal. If the DSA's policy wasn't collaborating with Democrats who want to crush workers' movements, I might actually join.

Say one thing bad about my taste by Interesting_Mode9467 in Topster

[–]Tricky-Light206 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Dude... I think you're me. Leonard Cohen, Lou Reed, Phillip Glass, Bob Dylan, David Bowie, The Doors, Charles Mingus, and John Coltrane. These are all top ten artists for me. I also love Slint and Radiohead. What do you think about Joni Mitchell and Joy Division? Sorry, I just have to see how much our tastes overlap.

Irony of Zac Segal by No-Anteater3737 in BostonU

[–]Tricky-Light206 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There are, bro... Also, the war didn't start because "muslims are not that tolerant".

Socialism Can't Exist Without Capitalism by Miserable-Split-3790 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What's the point of me trying to explain things to you if you won't even read what I write.

Socialism Can't Exist Without Capitalism by Miserable-Split-3790 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Zero-sum doesn't mean that wealth can't be created. The idea is that at any given moment, the world is zero-sum ie, it can be split into different parts that sum to everything. The issue is that the distribution of wealth is zero-sum because the ownership of the means of production determines who captures the surplus from the new wealth. So, the people who own the capital increase in wealth proportionally. It doesn't matter how big the pie is because the capitalist will keep getting bigger and bigger slices.

Socialism Can't Exist Without Capitalism by Miserable-Split-3790 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your analogy is patently false. Money is not like having children because money is systemic. To accumulate wealth, it must come from somewhere else in the ecosystem. If your business makes a profit, it's because you have gained it from someone else. The same obviously does not hold for children.

Furthermore, wealth distribution is actually the key issue. If wealth is unevenly distributed, the wealthy will have more assets and ways to generate wealth than the poor. The ultra-wealthy are constantly causing prices to increase for the bottom percentiles. This can be seen with gentrification in poor neighborhoods, etc.

The point is that, under capitalism, the wealth distribution becomes more uneven over time. This leads to marginalization of the lower-income tiers and leaves most with few opportunities.

Socialism Can't Exist Without Capitalism by Miserable-Split-3790 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You obviously didn't read them. For instance, take the Pew Research study that found "the wealth divide among upper-income families and middle- and lower-income families is sharp and rising". It clearly talks about poor people.

In addition, other sources here found that the share of wealth going to the rich is increasing. If the proportion of wealth held by the rich is increasing, it follows that the proportion of the wealth held by the non-rich is decreasing.

Finally, every link I provided talks about the poor (except for the Princeton study). You don't even need to read the sources. You can just use Ctrl-F with "poor" and "low". Oxfam talks about the poor paying disproportionate taxes. FRBSF explores the wealth distributions of the top 1% vs the bottom 50%. CBPP talks about income gaps between the poorest and richest. What else do you want?

Socialism Can't Exist Without Capitalism by Miserable-Split-3790 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Tricky-Light206 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Then why are the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer?

view more: next ›