Hold up - the terms “authoritarian” and “totalitarian” are banned in this community? I have to admit, I think that is an absolutely absurd rule that can only stand to benefit the far-right. Are there alternative terms which are preferred without the ideological baggage outlined below, or are we just meant to not criticise far-right regimes which exert extreme control over their citizens by use of the “””rule of law”””?

I don’t think bullying dorks who cosplay as their cyberpunk OC will help. Bully billionaires instead.

Phoenician wants a word.

Thanks for the well-considered and thoughtful response - I appreciate it.

Just to clarify, I’m not trying to make some typical liberal argument that China is evil or anything like that - I’m very far left and I’m not here just criticising China just because that’s what the mainstream media has told me to do. I just think it does leftists like myself no favours to pretend that China is perfect and that we shouldn’t criticise it - and the essay linked above, in my opinion, seems to be a bit of a reflexive defense of China, rather than actually considering the criticism - to me it seems they are choosing arguments to support their position rather than letting the facts and their beliefs lead them to a conclusion.

I don’t think we have to accept that any amount of imbalanced transactions of value necessarily guarantee that billionaires are inevitable - plenty of systems exist where there are “winners and losers” but the system itself reaches an equilibrium state. There are so many solutions which could be implemented to prevent billionaires from existing, and I would say that billionaires can only ever exist when there is a fundamental flaw in the society which produces them. It should be impossible to so thoroughly capture and centralise wealth and power to a point where an individual can have that much.

I’ve re-read this comment and your previous comment multiple times and I’m not really clear on what you mean.

My point is that the essay’s argument is weak because it completely ignores scale and proportionality. It uses the language of marxism to justify capitalism.

I don’t personally agree with it, but I was willing to consider the notion on its own merits rather than in contrast with ideology - but even when I do, I find it a wholly unsatisfactory justification

This is pretty typical self-justifying bullshit. They’re justifying pre-held beliefs (china is good; china has billionaires; therefore billionaires must be good) rather than actually considering the claim based on the merits. (is it actually a good thing that china has billionaires, and what does that say about socialism/marxism as practiced in china)

You can believe that people have different needs and that we don’t all need to be absolutely 1:1 equal in terms of our material possessions etc. and that having some goal to work towards is beneficial to society (ambition) without having billionaires.

This essay is like trying to justify genocide by pointing out that sometimes, for the benefit of society, the death of an individual is preferable to the suffering of many. The issue with billionaires isn’t one of inequality in the micro - it’s the magnitude of that inequality, and the power it brings, which is the issue.

It’s quite sad that you consider that the only way to “take part in society” is to have a job. I’m disabled and though I do work I might not be able to do so in the future, and you’re essentially saying that if that happens I’ll no longer have any sort of value. I really think that’s some brainwashing, you can only see your own value through your labour. It’s like some kind of slave morality.

I think it’s far more important to protect the welfare of children who had no choice in whether they were born or not, than it is to “punish” poor people for making bad choices. What would you have as the alternative?

You keep having this whole “having your cake and eating it too” argument with yourself. You are simultaneously hard-done-by because you can’t go on a holiday every year, but also you’re not because you have a mortgage and a big childcare bill.

The reality of the situation is that there is no such thing as the middle class, it’s just propaganda made up by the ruling class to divide the working class, and it has worked wonders on you. You’re envious of your neighbours, and you see them as your enemies rather than your potential allies in the bigger fight. We are all exploited by the ruling class, and unless we can accept that, we’ll never be able to change things for the better.

Personally, I believe that criticising the efforts of activists with whom you share a cause is one of the lowest things you can do.

If I think there’s a better way, then I go do it, or at the very least I would participate in that group and try to bring them around to my way of thinking.

I definitely would not publicly criticise them because that doesn’t actually help the cause, it just damages it.

But of course, I can’t hold people to the same high expectations I hold of myself.

If you have a mortgage, you don’t fully own your house.

The reality is that you’re in the exact same class as your neighbour but you believe all the propaganda you’ve been fed about taking benefits making you somehow less of a person. You’re probably not in the bottom 10%, though, so there are definitely people struggling more than you.

If you have £3k a month child care then unless both of you are making over 3k a month salary then possibly you should consider one of you leaving their job and becoming a stay at home parent.

Look, I get it. Things are tough, and you work hard and you deserve better. What I’m trying to tell you is that you’re hating on the wrong people. Don’t blame your neighbour, blame your boss.

if you fully own your own home and your household has two people fully employed how in the hell does someone with €1600 a month have a living standard remotely close to yours? none of what you’re saying is adding up at all

If you’re struggling to make ends meet, you’re not middle class. You’re the exact same class as your neighbour. If you want to improve your conditions then you need to learn some solidarity instead of blaming them for your problems. They’re not the ones taking advantage. It’s the fucking rich and powerful that are lazy, do zero valuable work, and leech off the rest of society. Working class people scamming the tax system is a good thing, really - all those taxes would otherwise go to other rich twats anyways, so I’d much rather it went to your neighbour.

definitionally, the middle class literally cannot be in the bottom 10%. I’d really suggest you learn about those “handouts” you mention and look into how much they are, what the conditions for receiving it are, how hard they are to get, etc. and consider whether you’d be able to live on them.

Would be way better off giving it to the people in the bottom 10% of wealth.

This smacks of accelerationist rhetoric to me. We absolutely can help people to understand that electoralism doesn’t work without them having to experience some sort of revelatory moment. But it needs us to log off and talk to people in real life.

There is a photograph which accompanies the article of one of the protesters holding a placard which reads, “this is fascism”.

I feel like it’s totally wrong to apply such a broad generalisation (“They don’t want the [genocide] to stop”) to such a group of people. The people of Israel are not a monolith, and I know for a fact that there are those in Israel who have been protesting their genocidal policies the whole time. It seems very plausible to me that a good number of the protesters calling for an end to the current violence will be opposed to the whole settler-colonialist project, in the same way that I wholeheartedly despise the state of the country that I was born in.

To have their admin powers revoked, obviously.

As soon as someone in a position of power shows their willingness to use that power to further their own agenda in any way, rather than for the benefit of the community, they should immediately and unequivocally have that power withdrawn.

Rooki has showed us all who he is, and what he is willing to do with power. He has not felt any consequences. In future, he’ll just be more cautious with how he abuses his power.

Apologies, I misunderstood the conversation chain - I thought that you were arguing from a position of already having agreed the initial assumption of the operation being endorsed by the CIA etc.

I absolutely 100% believe that the US wanted to replace Maduro with a president favourable to them. But if the claims that the election results are fraudulent hold no water, it would be trivial for Maduro to simply release the receipts. I can’t think of any reason why he wouldn’t do so other than to cover up that he lost the election.

Now there’s a whole other conversation about whether US propaganda led him to lose the election, but that’s immaterial to the outcome. As much as I believe all of these systems are flawed, by their own measure, he should publish the receipts or step down.