Comment on Is the Federation "Communist" or Socialist?
Hextubewontallowme@lemmy.ml 3 months ago
Idk… for good starters, I’d ask ye this
I’d rather ask how it is not capitalist:
Is it capitalist
Does this federation have a system of unequal exchange and resource exploitation of one place to another, the core, essentially, with the majority of the federation being an large mass of desperate wage and salary laborers, once self-sufficient peasants, in the resource-rich place of the periphery, under the guise of “investment”? Does this federation love to lend and privatize foreign economies, and cut social spending, a la IMF, in order to dominate the latter’s economy? Does this federation have a policy of CAPITALIST settler-colonialism, based on classical-liberal style property rights and genocide of the indigenous people? If this is all merely in the past of class struggles and national liberation movements, and the federation has fought and abolished such forms of exploitation, yay
To check if its communist, in the more modern form {there is such thing as primitive communism}, however:
Does this federation wrecked out any chance of capitalist and liberal restoration, due to past ‘authoritarianism’? Does this federation work without the use of money, any proprietorship, social class, and the force of government, but instead with collective ownership of major assets and modern cooperative values or ‘ideology’ being casually accepted as the norm, instead of as an old-fashioned ideology or academic subject? This is to ensure that Communism is dominant, as to be practically ‘Communist’, in such a federation Does surplus value, from labor, go into the needs of the people, instead of going towards any capitalist profit or landlord’s rent Note Personal property, such as watches and purses, do not count as private property, unless you’re using it to make into an asset, like a steam engine or a collection of buildings to take rent upon
MrSaturn@startrek.website 3 months ago
I would say the Federation is basically a liberal utopia so it’s against being liberal
GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 3 months ago
One needs to be careful with the word “liberal”, because it means very different things in different contexts (in large part due to political parties identifying themselves as “liberal”). In the stricter political-philosophical sense, liberalism is very closely tied with capitalism and the “freedom” to own things as private property (market allowing) and do what you want with it.
MrSaturn@startrek.website 3 months ago
Yeah the Federation has private property and individual rights, so we wouldn’t that be liberal?
GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 3 months ago
Does the Federation really have private property? Are there landlords and business tyrants? Or does it just have personal property, things a person owns for their own personal use?
Personal rights also aren’t monopolized by liberalism, as much as neoliberal media tells you it is so. Personal rights also existed in classical slave societies, under feudalism, and yes, under every Marxist state (I don’t know about the weirdo ““communist”” ones like Peru or Cambodia)
buckykat@hexbear.net 3 months ago
No, the Federation has personal property, not private property.
Hextubewontallowme@lemmy.ml 3 months ago
Huh, do you exactly know exactly the term?
To me, Liberalism is to capitalism, like Christianity was for western feudalism; a ideological framework that the ruling classes of its day uses to justify their existence
Image