• 2 Posts
  • 84 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2025

help-circle














  • Sure. I dont want to demonize people that arent left. Theres a portion of those that align with us on certain topic, some are apathic, and some are also violently against us.

    Sure I may be taken by propaganda sometimes. Its not easy to tell. But focusing on specific issues helps clear that a bit. Someone that calls themselves “left” but doesnt believe in a completely socialized healthcare system, do they really have a leftist view on this topic? Im all for joining forces for some cause, but are the wealthy “leftists” really for, or against, inheritance taxes, socialized healthcare, …?

    Besides, this doesnt touch on the issues of social networks priviledging certain political positions. If you look at instagram, most posts that appear are recomendations of the network to the specific user, rather than posts of who they follow. The interface pushes you off of what you intended to see and into a personalised recomendations playlist. Demobilizing “progressive” content à la us Democrat party gets normal reach in those platforms, while actual mobilizing content gets reduced reach.







  • I think you’re missing my point now. Maybe the headphone example is weak, but it illustrates the point. Abundance is not necessarily abundance of wealth. Im arguing that reducing general production and increasing wealth are compatible. Making the distribution of wealth depend on abundant production, independently of quality, only overworks people and pollute the world.

    Legitimizing degrowth exterminates those unable to afford resistance to oligarchy.

    This seems too general. Defending degrowth may do that if its done in the specific way you have described before, but not generally. Resistance to oligarchy and general improvements to quality of life could have degrowth as a consequence, not the other way around. What you seem to be criticizing is that “other way around” thesis.