this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2024
368 points (85.5% liked)

solarpunk memes

2843 readers
43 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 49 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Dictators and war are not unique to capitalism, they are just more profitable under it.

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah all these things existed long before capitalism

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They precede Capitalism, sure, but in our modern world it's easy to draw the line between those and Capitalism. Capitalism is very effective at incentivizing these.

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Either way, lets eat the rich

[–] doingthestuff@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago (6 children)

I'm not pro-capitalism but I'm curious what flavor of replacement you would choose.

[–] H1jAcK@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago

Super capitalism. It's like capitalism, but superer.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Socialism. When properly implemented, it has a fair amount in common with capitalism but you keep what you earn, the disabled aren't left to die, and billionaires aren't an option.

[–] Kolrami@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The only one of these I can see socialism eliminating is unemployment. You can easily have dictators and wars with socialism.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Let's try Universal Basic Income with proportional representation and lobbying made illegal.

[–] jumjummy@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

How about capitalism with the appropriate government controls? Break up monopolies and all anti-competitive practices. Use regulations to actually punish violators (and not with some small fraction of profits gained from that violation). Increasing tax rates for the super wealthy with the right tax shelter penetrating laws.

Sprinkle in some appropriate social policies and safety nets.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Capitalism inherently violates a basic tenet of justice. For example, consider a bus vehicle company, the employer owns 100% of the produced buses and owes 100% of liabilities for used-up inputs. The employer is solely legally responsible for the whole result of production. Workers are jointly de facto responsible for using up inputs to produce buses. The basic tenet of justice is that legal and de facto responsibility should match. There is clearly a mismatch here in capitalism @memes

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Wait, so you're saying the bus drivers should be responsible for maintenance of the bus they drive, and own it, and the company should just take a cut? So, uber but for busses?

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I was describing a company to produce buses i.e. the actual vehicle. Not for driving buses. The alternative to what I describe as the problem with capitalism is to structure all firms as worker cooperatives. In a worker cooperative, the basic tenet of justice is satisfied i.e. legal and de facto responsibility match @memes

[–] HaywardT@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 8 months ago

Like southwest airlines?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jlou@mastodon.social 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

I prefer Georgist economic democracy.

  1. All firms are structured as worker coops
  2. Land and natural resources are collectively owned with revenue derive from common ownership going out as a UBI
  3. Common pools of capital collectivized across multiple worker coops through a system of venture communes.
  4. Public goods and mutual aid institutions funded through some variant of quadratic funding

@memes

[–] Axiochus@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

How are dynamics of violence and power handled? Within such systems I'm always worried about elites, coercion, consolidation. How are binding decisions made, and how do we prevent those powers from bringing about the things mentioned previously?

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Worker coops are firms that are democratically worker-controlled. Communes are democratic also.

Unemployment would be less worrying due to the UBI. Worker coops are committed to their workers so have incentives to train them. Also, worker coops prefer to reduce pay during downturns rather than employment.

Trade policy between communes would be set by free agreement. Quadratic funding helps resolve collective action problems such as for defense. Power concentration is severely limited @memes

[–] Axiochus@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Hmmm, I see. I guess I'm asking about the nonlegal basis of law, or the non-normative basis of norms. Is there good contemporary research about the social dynamics of this at scale? I remember Lenin writing about commune clusters, and there's mention of scaling in Das Kapital volume one.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It was a good question. I am limited in response length because I am on Mastodon.

In terms of social dynamics of a stateless society, The Possibility of Cooperation by the game theorist Michael Taylor uses game theory to argue against the Hobbesian case for the state. Radical Markets by E. Glen Weyl covers how to do common ownership with minimal administration @memes

[–] Axiochus@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Thank you for the sources! I'll take a look eventually. Since both sources seem to interface with rational choice theory, there's probably a cool post-Homansian social network analysis angle that can be explored. I.e. how the weights & pathways of available choices can be modulated by the types of ties between people. I guess I'd expect entity-level decisions to be shaped by emergent structures, regardless of what their initial state was. So, a co-op could become something else entirely over time, regardless of what it says on the can. It's super neat that my Marxist thought is exploring these areas as well (sorry for the label!).

[–] Brendanjones@fosstodon.org 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

@jlou Can you expand on number 3? Distributing resources and/or capital for investment is the part of economic democracy for which I've never quite seen a good solution.

I've read Schweickart, Dahl, Olin Wright and Hahnel and none of their proposed systems are that great IMHO.

@memes

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 8 months ago

Based on ideas of Dmytri Kleiner and Glen Weyl. The commune's members lease all their capital from the commune. This is structured for minimal administration from the commune. Each member coop self-assesses a price for their capital. They pay a recurring fee on that price. The member is required to transfer the capital to anyone that pays the self-assessed price. With the right percentage, the incentives to over-assess and under-assess cancel out. The fee can be used to invest in coops @memes

[–] Brendanjones@fosstodon.org 1 points 8 months ago

@jlou
A different thread: why only worker co-ops, and not also other sorts of co-ops?

I do wonder if, in order to encourage innovation, it's a good idea to allow non-coops in limited forms.

For example (and feel free to adjust these numbers), you can start a business and employ people but as soon as you pass €1 million revenue or 5 employees (whichever is first) then it has to become a co-op.

The existence of UBI, UBS and an economy that's majority co-ops should limit exploitation.

@memes

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Socialism. Worker Ownership of the Means of Production. Society run and owned by the Proletariat, for the good of the people, not profits for megacorps and large Capitalists.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The fact that this is downvoted tells me that American propaganda is still going strong.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I think it's also a symptom of Solarpunk not being explicitly anticapitalist, it's an aesthetic and a goal that liberals can appreciate as they see climate change accelerating, but haven't done the analysis necessary to agree that Capitalism is one of the largest underlying causes of climate change.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Anti-capitalism ≠ socialism @memes

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (11 children)

We've had this discussion before. While technically correct, what you describe as what you want would best be described as Market Socialism, you just prefer to take on the mantle of Liberal for what I perceive as optic reasons.

The majority of anticapitalism is Socialist in nature, though you'll probably still find mercantilists or monarchists somewhere.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Yeah, we probably should have been working on that 50 years ago. Oh well

[–] Blamemeta@lemm.ee 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Dictators, unemployment, and war are not because of capitalism. Do yall think the worlds problems started with the 16th century?

[–] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think you accidentally your first word. Lol.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] humbletightband@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago

Not like it started with capitalism, these 3 have drastically changed under capitalism. Our only hope is that they will change further under techno-feudalism into something less devastating

[–] therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip 13 points 8 months ago

That's not funny, it's just propaganda

[–] megabat@lemm.ee 13 points 8 months ago

JFC people this meme hits almost all the antisemitic tropes. All it needs are the wings rubbing together.

[–] Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Centralization not capitalism is the root cause of many issue and the more we blame capitalism the further we are away from reality.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Capitalism fundamentally has issues with it that cannot be solved via regulation. There is absolutely no reason why it's necessary that there be petite dictators in charge of Production, rather than democratic control.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›