• rambling_lunaticEnglish
    17·
    5 months ago

    Economic democracy is just an aspect of a healthy socialist society.

    Mutualism is a type of socialism.

    The false dichotomy is between Leninism and liberalism.

      • areyouevenreal@lemm.eeEnglish
        5·
        5 months ago

        A dichotomy is where there are only two choices or extremes. By saying it’s a false dichotomy you are pointing out there are other options. It doesn’t necessarily mean the two options from before are the same.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          5 months ago

          By saying it’s a false dichotomy you are pointing out there are other options.

          Ah, was a bit confused, because I’ve never seen anyone doubt the alternatives of Fascism or Anarchism.

      • rambling_lunaticEnglish
        9·
        5 months ago
        1. Proudhon referred to himself as a socialist.
        2. Revolutionary Catalonia, the Makhnovshina, and the MAREZ all existed in the 20th century. All of them had mutualist elements and called themselves socialist. The successors to the MAREZ, the CGALs, still exist and still consider themselves socialist.
        • J Lou@mastodon.social
          15·
          5 months ago

          Proudhon referred to himself as a socialist in the 19th century sense. Most people don’t have what Proudhon advocated in mind when they use the term, socialism, today. It is clearer to use a different word, and also helps the left avoid any unnecessary negative associations and connotations

          @leftism

          • rambling_lunaticEnglish
            6·
            5 months ago

            You’re not gonna dodge the negative associations for long. The bourgeoisie, state bureaucracy, and their useful idiots will just call you a woke radical left postmodern cultural neomarxist anyways. If you’re gonna get called a socialist anyways, might as well insist on using the word as it was meant to be used, rather than ceding it to be used as an insult.

            You also ignored point #2

            • J Lou@mastodon.social
              13·
              5 months ago

              Classical laborists and their intellectual descendants’ case against capitalism boils down to the idea that the positive and negative results of production are the private property of the workers in the firm. When understood properly, the unique arguments they make are that we should abolish capitalism in the name of private property. The left should lean into this framing. It’s hard to call private property supporters Marxists.

              Socialism doesn’t clearly evoke those examples to people

              @leftism