this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2024
933 points (85.5% liked)

Lefty Memes

4355 readers
629 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!

Rules

Version without spoilers

0. Only post socialist memes


That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)


1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here


Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.


2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such


That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.


3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.


That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).


4. No Bigotry.


The only dangerous minority is the rich.


5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)


6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.



  1. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (31 children)

Socialism removes the fact that Police serve the wealthy, rather than the people, so this inherently means they aren't class traitors.

There would be an expansion of social programs and services, better access to housing, and overall fewer crimes of desparation.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Police serve the wealthy, rather than the people

Are there common every day examples where this happens? I'll be honest my exposure to the police is extremely limited and from a UK perspective. Do you mean like the police will prioritise responding faster to wealthy people and are more likely to put resources in solving crimes against them than your average person?

[–] VerticaGG@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Evictions, disproportionately of those most vulnerable, due to Austerity via the Neoliberal policies of Reagan and Thatcher which very much persist today, maximizing, subsidizing the profit of fortune 500 companies while making welfare a slur.

Cops break up people who are just trying to feed the hungry.

ICE; Locking children in cages -- No human is illegal. The Contras were perpetrated by the imperial core, and then the imperial family eats up the propaganda to hate the refugees fleeing those situations.

Prisons, during covid lockdowns, put prisoners in 24/7 solitary. Solitary is torture. It is so bad that is an effective motivator to force prisoners to instead labor for cents a day.

Cops illegally raid safe injection sites, and spread disinformation about People who use drugs, dehumanizing themselves in the process.

Read about the Comstock Raids, as far back as 1860s, the reason that motivated the Stonewall Uprising a century later, and dont think they up and stopped harrassing queer folks of color for doing so much as existing in public.

The origins of the police forces were to chase down runaway slaves.

It is not "a few bad eggs". It's not about a bug of the system, it's the features it was designed for, through Comstocks weaponization of the Post Office to control bodies and autonomy, into modern day surveillance state and militarization.

What we are talking about is Violence. SYSTEMIC Violence.

There is no more violent beast than the Settler-Colonial White Supremacist, with all it's manifest destiny. This Prison System's history is well documented, and evidence of it's violence is more apparent and accessible everyday.

Abolition is a process and it will take time, the two greatest things we can do to obsolete prisons and police are:

  1. encourage and popularize anti-authoritarian parenting methods and 2) build strong community groups and mutual aid networks.

We must be free from class, from heirarchies of domination. These are inherently violent

That Dang Dad on YT is a great resource, and that's a starting point, because there is no justice unless you adress the root cause, and the truth is always on the side of the oppressed.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No, I mean by upholding Private Property Rights and enforcing racist and anti-poor laws they uphold the brutal status quo.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 13 points 5 months ago (2 children)

No, I mean by upholding Private Property Rights

What does this mean though? Like if someone breaks into my house then they shouldn't be coming over to investigate?

enforcing racist and anti-poor laws they uphold the brutal status quo

Is this not an issue with the laws of the country rather than the police? I feel like it would be an even bigger issue if the police just became a law unto themselves and decided on their own what they should laws they should or shouldn't enforce.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No, that's not what I mean. I am not referring to personal home ownership, but the system of Capitalism.

The anti-poor laws and racist laws exist because of class dynamics, not vibes. The issue is Capitalism itself.

I am not arguing that police should just do whatever.

[–] rekorse@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I honestly can't figure out what point you are making. I see a lot of buzz-words like anti-poor, racist, private property rights, status quo, etc. but I don't understand how you think this plays out practically. The person you are replying to was asking for real-world examples of the cops defending rich white people in instances they wouldnt support poor non-white people.

I'm not even saying I disagree necessarily, just that you haven't answered the initial question.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There are systemic issues core to how Capitalist systems are set up, and the violent arm that upholds these is the police.

Does that make sense?

[–] duffman@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Your comment speaks to high level concepts but you didn't provide an the example to ground it to reality.

Like others have mentioned they aren't seeing these examples of core issues having impacts on their day to day lives/communities. I'm not either. When it comes down to it, laws written to apply to everyone are generally enforced for everyone.

Catching violent perpetrators pretty much always takes priority over non-violent theft. When we see acts of violence get immediate police attention it feels like the image you are trying to portay is inaccurate.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I am not referring to unequal application of the law, but the law itself and the police as its enforcers.

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Cool. Now give real actionable examples of this stuff happening. I'm not saying it doesn't, I'm fairly sure it does. People keep prodding you for SPECIFIC EXAMPLES though, not just a definition.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The violence of Capitalism is ensured by Private Property Rights, ie Capitalists can exist. Without police, Capitalism would not exist.

Redlining as a concept is practiced to this day.

What do you mean a "specific example?"

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Cases where this has happened. Articles detailing actual, specific, times that these things have happened.

To be clear - I agree with you. I'm merely trying to point out why people seem to be talking past you, and you past them.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Where what has happened, Capitalism remaining legal and enforced via state violence? That's the status quo almost everywhere.

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not going to keep going on this rhetoric treadmill with you. Once again, I agree in bulk with what you're saying, I'm merely trying to point out why you're not really having an impact with the words you're saying. Im reasonably sure you know exactly what kinds of examples people want to see. Both refusing to supply them or acting ignorant to the request degrade your argument and make it feel like you aren't arguing in good faith, you're just shouting talking points.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

Amazon is owned by Jeff Bezos. Workers do not own it and cannot own it. ✌️

[–] Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ok, for one example, after the 2008 housing market drop, banks bought the debt from other banks intentionally writing bad loans, which they then resold to third parties. This buying up of the debt of the banks that collapsed during this time lead to banks pushing families out of their homes, many of which were paid-up, but the lending institution behind them had failed, in order to resell the property later, when the market prices had recovered, or use the land for other developments. This was enforced by the police. Bankers did not go around forcing people out of their houses, the police did it at their behest.

Another is laws created specifically to punish people for being homeless. Laws like not being able to camp anywhere near a place they might be able to get themselves out of homelessness, e.g. a place with jobs, and other resources, not some place way out in the forest. These are also only effective because the police use violence to enforce them. Anti-solicitation laws fall into this category. Police often don't realize that (speaking for my country) they are not constitutional at the federal level. Police departments that know about this tell their cops to do it anyway because it's not like homeless people will likely be able to sue them.

A third is the enforcement of petty traffic fines. Things like window tint, or minor violations in situations where the safety concern isn't present. These fines are, often, the brunt of how they fund themselves. Petty violations, like tint, are also used to go on fishing expeditions, so they can either wrack-up more fines, or make an arrest, even if that means intentionally escalating the situation, lying about what happened, and giving false testimony in court. More arrests, more convictions, equals more money for the police, and the legal industry as a whole. If you work with, or around, police, like I have, you will hear them discuss things like testilying. Bouncing ideas off of each other as to how they can make bad arrests, and use illegal levels of force, while having a technicality to maintain their immunity, e.g. screaming quit resisting, while in a position where they know cameras can't really see what is happening. This is just the tip of this iceberg, I would need thousands, upon thousands, of words to detail all the shit I have heard police say, and see police do.

I can go on, but I think I have made my point.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 1 points 4 months ago

I'm late to reply but thank you for the response, this is the kind of response and examples I was looking for.

[–] Censored@lemmy.world -3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Socialism isn't a model for policing, unless you love the secret police.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 7 points 5 months ago

Nope, it's an economic structure that gets rid of the largest sources of poverty in Capitalist society, and poverty is the largest factor for crime.

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How your country runs economically informs what kinds of laws you hold valuable in society, informs what kind of policing you have. Socialism isn't specifically about policing, correct, but to act like it's not all interconnected is ludicrous.

[–] Censored@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I agree with @Cowbee@lemmy.ml . You can either try to copy the policing model used in, say, East Germany or the USSR, with it's delightfully large secret police force, but that's more from the authoritarian political system rather than the socialist policies. Alternately, you could try to copy the policing model used in democratic socialist countries, the nordic model, which is more influenced by their political system rather than socialist policies. Countries with socialist programs have all kinds of different police systems. There's no policing model that always goes with socialism. I will say that socialism may or may not get rid of poverty, it really depends on the wealth of the country. If the country is poor, socialism isn't going to make them rich. Ideally it should reduce inequality, however we see that while it can reduce economic inequality, it does not always adequately address privilege.

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago

I didn't say that the policing model goes away, or that we should have secret police a LA the USSR.

The words I said were: your country's economic model informs what laws you hold valuable.

This is easily true. We currently have the system in place of "get more, more good." An abundance of our laws, some of the ones we hold most dear, adhere to that. Protecting property is one thing that our legal system and police force does well.

Contrast to a more equality based economic model. If our society values raising people who are down up, sometimes at a mild cost to someone who's already doing well, then our laws change. Suddenly we see a value shift in our legal system from get more/protect what we have, to let's help the downtrodden a bit.

Second, I said that this all informs what policing you have.

Again, this pretty naturally follows from the previous point. Police exist to uphold the laws, at least ostensibly. Their interfacing with society depends on what society has said we hold valuable enough to codify into law. This is where you might get such laws as rent control, where we have determined it's valuable to set limits to the year over year increase someone has to pay for their dwelling, at the slight cost of some profit to the owner.

All of these things are connected. Correct, socialism isn't a method of policing, but our method of policing is born of what our society holds valuable. It's all connected.

load more comments (29 replies)