this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
268 points (92.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43859 readers
1561 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Cloak@lemmy.ml
mekhos@lemmy.ml
tmpod@lemmy.pt
14specks@lemmy.ml
268
Why do some people defend the billionaires and capitalism? (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 month ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
251 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The PRC is absolutely a viable alternative, it's a Socialist Market Economy that has been steadily transfering Private Property into Public Property as markets coalesce into monopolist syndicates, which are then capable of central planning.

[–] hostops@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

They have the most wild form of capitalism there is. And they married it with a lot of corruption and zero political freedom. This is not an alternative. Please.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

They have a Socialist Market Economy, and married it to a Dictatorship of the Proletariat following whole-process people's democracy. One of the focuses of Xi's presidency has been anti-corruption, along with steady socialization of the private sector. Read Socialism Developed China, Not Capitalism. You have an ultra-idealist vision of Socialism that is anti-Marxist. Private property is socialized by degree, not decree!

[–] hostops@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes I have seen you in other comments. And we both know what is the actual state and level of freedom, poverty, and capitalism and corruption in China. Maybe organize a protest in China.

I know you like their system, but for some reason you fail to see issues with their system.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

I fail to see the issues you imagine replicated in reality. Leave your mind palace.

[–] Abnorc@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Agreed. You can't argue with how effective it's been for the country as a whole, but I don't think i'd rather live there as an individual.

[–] hostops@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I would not live there. I value freedom and privacy. (In a healthy European way)

[–] Samsuma@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

What "healthy European" freedom looks like:

What "healthy European" privacy looks like:

[–] hostops@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"I have an uncle who smoked whole life and is 98 years old" I am sure you know what you have been doing when you presented your "evidence". Not cool.

[–] Samsuma@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I've re-read this several times and I still don't have the slightest clue to what you're referring to, lib. It's clear-as-day that you're just another "They hate us for our freedom" folks and don't actually care about freedom or privacy for all.

[–] hostops@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 month ago

(I am contemplating whether your are just trolling me and I should stop participating in this debate. But lets assume you really did not understood my point.)

  1. You typed in google something like "EU failing privacy/democracy/freedom" and posted top results. And all those cases are real, but are cherry picked. Therefore I responded with a classical argument about why smoking is "not bad for your health". https://www.logicalfallacies.org/anecdotal.html
  2. Your results did not include any actual indexes or aggregation of the data.

Please check this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices especially "list of scores by country" where you also have some historic entries.

To help you with some conclusions:

  1. EU countries are by far most free and private. Yes of course with their own issues but still way better than any other country.
  2. China is awful regarding this topic.

So why I had a problem with your response: I strongly believe you already knew the above two facts. You just decided to ignore them and presented me with some problems eu has so you can win the argument. So... I do not like you tried to "win argument" with a logical fallacy which is counterproductive for the debate. And when we just throw random arguments so opposing point of view comes out as bad, everyone comes out a little more radical in their view and noone changes their opinion. And I spent some time writing those comments (not with research but by forming thoughts and sentences in my second language). By turning the debate to this "Facebook like arguing" you destroyed my effort to participate in this community.

Also in response to your latest accusation: I specifically told you I have a healthy relationship with freedom, and "they hate us for our freedom" does not belong in this category.