• queermunist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      This is literally idealism.

      You have an idea about a market solution to the problem, and then act like you’ve solved the problem.

      The problem isn’t a lack of ideas! The problem is a lack of implementation! You have to get these ideas into the real world somehow, and revolution is the only way you can do that. There are billionaires aligned against implementing these ideas. You have to stop them.

      • Zorque@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Revolution is also more than eating the rich. Its also setting a framework for the future through non-violent action. Organizing and interacting both with local communities and national and international concerns.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Its over man, I just look at those sad little true believers as pathetic comic relief.

        They’d be the ones in the town squares pre-revolution scolding passers by for not blindly following the wisdom of their oppressive monarchs.

        “Stay the course! So I can feel like I’m safe and that everything is working as it’s supposed to!”

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Which country is the model to emulate? Which country has had the successful revolution?

        • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          11 months ago

          Many countries have successfully overthrown previous governments and implemented new ones. It depends what you mean by ‘successful’.

          • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            11 months ago

            It depends what you mean by ‘successful’.

            I’m asking which ones did it by their definition of successful. Which country should we emulate?

            • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              There will be people who thought it was successful, and people who thought it was unsuccessful, in every revolution. You’d need to clarify who ‘they’ are.

            • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              And as for me, I’m not sure there’s anything we can do about this, even with a revolution - at least with such a small number of us that actually care. If the majority actually wanted to change from the status quo, maybe then a revolution could work.

        • K3zi4@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well, I mean, historically, the USA had a very successful revolution in that they have become the greatest world power nowadays…

          Even if they are a capitalist crazed two party nation, where a majority struggle to survive and they have to pay for the basic human right of healthcare, all in the name of some “free market” to help the rich get richer at their own expense.

    • flipht@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      I hate to break this to you, but these have to go hand in hand.

      Government, and the individuals who make up the government, are balancing a lot of competing demands.

      Until one of those demands may include the loss of use of their property, at the very least, then they will always be more incentived to overvalue the perspective of the rich. And the rich will literally say, yeah, it’s bad, but we can slap a bandaid on it - 20% or the cost for 40% of the solution, that should get us by!

      Some other overwhelming force will eventually be necessary to change the calculus of what an “acceptable solution” looks like. Because with your market regulation, you will always have people willing to pay the fine instead of following the rules, and if they are allowed to continue externalizing those costs to the rest of us, we will continue to have less room to request less benefit, and we will have to take what they decide to give us. Which I can almost guarantee will be pennies compared to what it costs us in the meantime.