There’s clearly a lean to the left side of things in Lemmy instances, with many people attacking people at the right.

In some cases regarding the climate crisis, there’s people blaming it on capitalism while hinting that communism/socialism are the solution to the climate crisis, because somehow having the state controlling the entire economy will lead to stop CO2 emissions.

A bit from the article:

The best way to protect the environment is to get rich. That way, there is enough money not only to meet the needs of ordinary people, but also to pay for cleaner power plants and better water-treatment facilities. Since capitalism is the best way to create wealth, humanity should stick with it.

Not the first time I’ve heard about this concept, and the more i look into the world the more I agree with it. Being green is kind of a luxury that not many people can afford, and the poorer people are the less they can afford green technology.

  • Blaze (he/him)@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Since capitalism is the best way to create wealth, humanity should stick with it.

    Wealth, but also inequality. Socialism (and I mean Europe socialism, not Soviet Union communism) is also able to create wealth, and also distribute it better among people.

    • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      European socialism would include European socialist countries. Those were Hungary, Yugoslavia, Poland, DDR

      • Sl00k@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nordic countries are currently blowing the US out of the water on every measurable metric so you might want to rethink that argument.

        • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I hope you are joking. Socialism is when the workers own the means of production. These social democracies do not the workers owning the means of production and hence are capitalist

          • what_is_a_name@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sounds like your definition of “socialism” is (like Cato’s) “a state that is easy to criticise”. ACS did are some of the most socialist governments. They are clever about it for sure but that is why they are so inconvenient. Hell look as Norway socialising profits a from oil exploration to lift an entire nation out of poverty.

          • psud@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            You what, mate? They’re among the most socialist nations in the world, more so than Argentina or China

              • psud@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                You are using a cold war definition of socialism. It’s outdated

                Socialism isn’t the opposite of democracy

                Socialism is what social democracies do.

                • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I hope you are joking. Socialism is when the workers own the means of production. These social democracies do not the workers owning the means of production and hence are capitalist

                  • psud@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Except it’s you that’s using an outdated definition for socialism, you are the odd one out here, the rest of us all agree on that as a type of socialism

                    Note that Wikipedia does not call Venezuela socialist or communist, though the outdated ideas you’re relying on do

              • Sl00k@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Your wiki links first sentence says it’s within socialism which would make them socialist.

                Social democracy is a political, social, and economic philosophy within socialism

                • psud@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Funnily enough Wikipedia’s entry for Saudi Arabia doesn’t use socialism anywhere in it, and Venezuela only has “socialist” in political party names

                  I wonder if to be socialist you need to implement social policies for the benefit of the people rather than for the benefit of the government (by preventing revolt)

      • Blaze (he/him)@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most of Western Europe have social programs (free education, free healthcare, etc.) and made it. The G7 counts France, Germany and Italy

        • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I hope you are joking. Socialism is when the workers own the means of production. These social democracies do not the workers owning the means of production and hence are capitalist

            • traveler01@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              The data shows it’s stagnated. It’s a common symptom between western european economies. The more they lean left, the worse their economy gets:

              Their GDP

              • what_is_a_name@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                If they are stagnating it’s despite leaning TO THE RIGHT - and hard - over the past 20 years. There are very few truly socialist parties left in Europe and very few are in power. Definitely not recently in France. Their stagnation and exploding inequality is due to capitalism taking over.

                It’s like California - a poor mixture of hopeful socialism and neoliberal cynical Reaganism.

                To drive the point home Macron is quite a bit pro capitalism right wing politician. Not any other way. P

                  • what_is_a_name@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Funny. That is the fallacy you’re commuting with capitalism. Oligarchy / widespread poverty is a feature of most systems we’ve invented so far. But for you that is deformation of capitalism and a feature only of socialism. Go figure. No true Scotsman for you either.

                    And about France - who would have thought that world history and politics is complicated!? (Not Cato. If all you read is Cato bullshit, you get a very simplistic understanding of the world)