• rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    4·
    2 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
      04·
      2 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_lunatic@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        4·
        2 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
          03·
          2 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