I’m just curious for the new or existing people? Lemmy.ml has taken a hard turn to the right since the reddit exodus. There’s been a lot of pro-imperialist propaganda being posted on world news, and a lot less diversity of opinion. It feels more neoliberal and neo-con to me.

Does anyone want to share what their political leanings are?

I’ll start; I’m anti-imperialist pro-state regulated capitalism. I believe we should have usage based taxes (toll roads, carbon tax) and luxury taxes, and I disagree with wealth taxes for people with less than $250 million. The state should spend more money on consumer protection in all industries (environment, health, finance, etc.) I believe in multipolarity vs. US hegemony.

  • Addfwyn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 years ago

    Marxist-Leninist. Of the type that would probably unironically be referred to as a tankie.

    I don’t see capitalism as a sustainable model for the world, you cannot grow infinitely with finite resources, and there is no way effective way to “reform the system from the inside”. Capitalists will actively sabotage such efforts as they go against their own best interests; they are dead set on convincing labor that it is also against their best interests, and have been depressingly effective at doing so.

    I believe that humanity will naturally move towards a more communist world order as a unipolarity gives way to a multipolar world. Probably not within my lifetime, but either humans will get there eventually or we will die out trying.

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 years ago

    I’m a Marxist-Leninist, I believe that the means of production should be owned by the workers and that the purpose of work is to produce things we all need to meet our collective needs.

    Capitalism is a dead end ideology which leads to concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny minority by design, and this minority of oligarchs exploits the rest of the people to subsidize their lavish lifestyle.

    Furthermore, any system based around constant growth and consumerism is fundamentally incompatible with our continual survival as a species. We need a system that strives for sustainable use of our resources.

  • DanPCz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    In practice, I’m a common social democrat.

    At heart, I’m an Anarchist. I don’t have enough knowledge and confidence to believe it would work but I believe it would be beneficial for us to try to make it work, even if it ends up failing

  • stewie3128@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 years ago

    I’d like the GOP and right-wing media to be vaporized in its entirety, and I’d like the establishment/corporatist wing of the Democratic party to be smashed to pieces. Maybe then we can hurry up and get going on some stuff.

  • pancake@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 years ago

    I’m a Marxist-Leninist, member of an organized group.

    I believe countries try to shape and weaponize citizens’ opinions about other countries, so I refuse to defend or criticize them unless I can argue that doing so is beneficial to my ideas (i.e., not based on feelings or ethics). Thus, I’m neutral towards most countries and defend multipolarity.

    I tend to doubt my ideas as much as I can.

  • PorkRollWobbly@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Syndicalist. A federation of industrial unions could run society as a whole in a way that benefits all.

  • TechyDad@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 years ago

    Republicans seem to want to turn back the clock to the 1950’s and in one aspect I agree with them. The top tax rate back then was 90%. That should be returned for anyone making over $10 million.

    Unlike Republicans, though, I think people should be free to be who they are - whether they’re LGBTQ or straight/cisgender, black or white, Christian or Jewish or atheist, or any other group I didn’t list. (I didn’t list all groups only because I don’t want this comment to be novel length.) Basically, as long as your actions affect only yourself and consenting adults, I’m fine with them.

    I’m also fine with parents having some control over what their kids do. I’m a parent myself and know that as a parent you need to make judgement calls as to what’s best for your child. I wouldn’t want someone else questioning my parenting based on their beliefs. However, there are limits. If your child is LGBTQ and you try to force them to be straight/cisgender, you aren’t acting in your child’s best interests. If your 10 year old child is raped and their life is in danger, but you refuse to allow them to have an abortion because your religion doesn’t allow it, then you’re harming your child.

    Also, a person’s “parental rights” shouldn’t mean that they get to decide that certain books are banned from everyone reading them. My son actually just finished reading a book because it had been banned and we laughed over how innocuous the “ban triggering passage” was compared to some stuff in the Bible.

    Basically, I think I’d call myself a Pragmatic Progressive. I advocate for progressive causes, but I also realize that society can often be slower to adapt than we like. While we would love to be able to pass X and have it be widely adopted immediately, there’s often a series of slow moving battles to get X passed and another slow march to get wide acceptance. We can’t simply throw in the political towel at the first setback. Neither can we pass up 10% of our goal being within our grasp because we’re holding out for 100%. We need to get whatever advancements we can while continually pushing for more.

  • Zarxrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 years ago

    When I was first becoming an adult (in the USA), I got into politics from talk radio. I became staunchly libertarian, perhaps a bit conservative learning. Over the years, as I started to gain more life experience, started to actually think about certain issues some more, hear more opposing viewpoints, and actually see how stuff played out over time, I slowly began turning more liberal. These days, I would say that I am left of center and mostly align with the Democratic party for voting purposes.

    • minorsecond@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 years ago

      This is precisely my experience. I am a recovering big L Libertarian (in the USA sense). Now I’d say I’m liberal, slowly moving more left.

  • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 years ago

    I think every person should have food, water, and shelter at the very least. Nobody should need to do anything for these basic necessities of life.

    I always thought this was a common thought but no, this apparently is a far left radical ideology. People should starve on the street unless they provide value to a capitalist is actually the common thought.

  • Joe_0237@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 years ago

    I’m a libertarian, leftist, socialist, and I’m strongly against digital copyright, politics and patents. I believe in freedom and free competition, and government investment in education, technology, and quality of life.

    Libertarian: People are overwhelmingly good, and freedom allows the good people to reliability outmenuver the bad. People should have every freedom in so far as they are not encroaching on the equal or greater freedoms of anyone else. No technology is inherently bad, tech in the hands all results in the victory of the good. A notable acception is weapons of mass destruction, as any use against any population is very bad morally. In general when tech is outlawed the good loose the ability to use it against the bad or for the betterment of humanity, and the bad maintain access and use it against the good. When only the bad guys have Drugs, Encryption, Guns, The internet, etc … the society is much worse off for it.

    Leftist: When governments invest tax money into the common good of the people, via things like education, technology, and quality of life, then societies are healther, wealthier, more innovative, and the people are happier for it. No one wants to be homeless, sick, or stupid, or to be surrounded by people who are. Government investment stimulates the economy, and if money is spent domestically it lands right back in the pockets of working tax payers.

    Socialist: When workers own stake in the companiess they work for, companies act in the interest of the workers (socialism). When companies are owned by investors, they act in the interst of the investors, usually against the interest of workers (capitalism). When companies act in the interst of the workers, wages are higher, workers are more free, and cost of living is lower. The people are happier. Governments does not need to be so big to keep the peace like they do today.

    Digital copyright: the belief in the lie that copying and or improving upon an ethereal digital resource constitutes theft, is a massive detriment to society. It is clearly false because no one looses anything. It is defended by perpetuating the fear that it it would be harder to profit if information was free. It would be a different world, but you can still make a profit through art on a physical medium, and in other ways. The lie is used to justify unjust control of software vendors over their customers, and to justify fake sales in which the physical computer hardware is sold but the ability to actually control it is not part of the sale. And sales where a book or movie is sold, but the user is never given the copy they purchased. It is also used to deprive the poor access to educational material, and to justify the destruction of cultural archives for future generations.

    Politics: Politicians are lower quality than ordinary people, because they are the people who wanted to rule, not the people who understand the impact of positive and negative of every singe decision. A monarchy has better chances of honest leadership because the quality if the monarch is random, instead of picked by might of advertising dollars out of a list of the worst people. The way to make a real good government involves a little lotocracy and a little meritocracy. My vision in short: a console, selected at random from the population, chooses qualification criteria for voting on a proposition, and a console is selected at random from the qualified public to make a decision.

    Pattents: A temporary government issued monopoly on a process or mechanism. Patents were the single worst lapse in logic of our society, they are anticompetitive and slow innovation (the incredibly successful free software community, operating on very little time and money, is a glimpse of what a patenless society could be). A free market cannot coexist with patents. Arguments for pattens boil down to, if i invest as though i have patent protection from competition and i don’t have it, my investment won’t pan out. In a society without patents, companies build and improve on each others work, making R&D cheaper and faster. Sure, billion dollar research investments would not pan out, but they would also be completely unnecessary, because starting from scratch or waiting a decade would not be required to participate in innovation.

    • Methylman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      Whats the solution to the issue small startups would face w.o patents when the mega-corps just take their innovation and package it differently?

      • Joe_0237@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        Don’t detail exactly what the innovation is before its ready to sell, it takes time to get something into a product and to get that product into production. Name recognition is everything, for some time the small starup is the name of the innovation, and that recognition does not just vanish. Other companies have built comparable or beter electric cars by now, but you know who im talking about when i say that electric car company.

        Alternateivly copy something a large corporation is doing, or better yet, build on something they are doing.

        Also employee owned companies tend not to aggressively expand. And governments need to break up the kind of company that is large enough to destroy all competition. That leads me to another opinion, buying another company should not be allowed in a capitalist economy, because that only ever makes the market less free.

    • dblsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      A while ago I watched a great video on Youtube explaining how a system without copyright could work for commercial software development (specifically for games), advocating for a “pay for production” model instead of “pay for access”. Unfortunately I can’t find the video anymore.

  • CMDR_Horn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 years ago

    I have many things to say, but I just can’t bring myself to discuss it in a public forum anymore. It’s not that I expect that I’d be on the opposite side of a lot of people so I’d be flamed and shut down. In truth I find myself fairly middle of the road, but politics has become so polarized and hate filled that I’m more saddened for the future than anything else. I worry for what world my kids will inherit from my generation. I have hope though for genZ they seem to fully get behind the concept of FAFO. I just want them to start voting before it’s too late.

  • Lets_taco_bout_it@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Just conservative not a republican because I feel they’ve lost their way as much as democrats did.

    Elephants and asses, screwing the masses.

    • Drewfro66@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      As I’ve gotten older I find myself being more of a conservative in the true definition of the term: a preference for slow and steady change, caution towards new ideas, and some amount of reverence for tradition.

      The issue is that the Republican party is not a Conservative Party. Joe Biden is a Conservative. The Republican party is a party for Reaction and Neoliberalism.

      • Tyrannosauralisk@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 years ago

        Yeah, very much this. As a scientist, my place on the political spectrum ought to be looking at a proposed change that is supposed to help and demanding “prove it” (and providing said proof when possible within my field). The hard part is then being ready to accept proof when given and swap my stance accordingly from opposition to agreement. This is where conservatives have failed. (People also need to accept that in the real world it’ll probably be imperfect proof and come up with reasonable expectations for what counts as adequate proof, ideally based on expert review.)

        But at this point there are many good ideas (like housing-first approaches to homelessness) that are well supported by data but are being held back because of “common sense” and emotions (we can’t just give people free housing!). So instead my place is sitting with the Progressives and saying “holy shit, how can we get conservatives to listen to reason?”

        • Drewfro66@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          As funny as it seems to say, I feel that “Conservativism” is unfairly maligned. Most of the bad things about what is called “Conservativism” are not really parts of Conservativism at all but are ideologies associated with Conservativism - “Rugged Individualism”, Neoliberalism in general, religious fundamentalism.

          We’ll probably disagree on this point (and that’s okay), but you can look at China. China is a very conservative country, with strong cultural values regarding family, social conformism, and civic nationalism. It is Conservativism without Capitalism, Individualism, or Religion.