I don’t just mean outrage or regular rage, I mean shock that someone was to the left of “legal weed and free college but only for those that operate a successful business for 3 years in a disadvantaged community” top-cop takes.

I think federating took them by surprise, looking back. For about a week, those smug liberals were at a loss to even fathom what Hexbears were saying, and could only chant bullshit about how we’re Russian/Chinese bots.

Sure they still do that but they’ve slightly adapted to Hexbear presence.

  • CaptFeather@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    in a way, but the main point is that the bourgeoisie has its tools within bourgeois democracy and it’s gonna use them to jeopardize every socialist effort

    So you’re saying Democratic socialism is flawed because it still allows elections, which are by nature corruptable?

    • s0ykaf [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      no, cuba has elections, and is actually more inclusive than america in that sense

      the point is you can’t vote the bourgeoisie out of power because they simply won’t let you. they will use their massive economic power to shut you down, in whatever ways said economic power can be used, including, as a last resort, to fund a violent reaction (through the army, paramilitary forces, or otherwise)

      edit: oh, nvm, you mean democratic socialism not as a way to achieve socialism, but to run it? if that’s the case then no socialist i’ve met has any issue with democracy at all, in fact most of us (at least among marxists) consider every socialist country to be more democratic than any capitalist one. we have a problem with liberal democracy, which we think is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in disguise

      • CaptFeather@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        you mean democratic socialism not as a way to achieve socialism, but to run it?

        Yes, this! Sorry, I wasn’t being clear enough. Good to know though. I’m still researching socialism so there’s a lot I don’t quite understand - I grew up religious conservative and have only been leftwing for the last few years. Definitely leaning hard into socialism the more I learn though. US voting is goddamn bullshit though with our archaic electoral college, gerrymandering, and the legal bribing we call “lobbying”.

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, socialist states hold elections. The problem isn’t democracy, it’s the bourgeois control of “democratic” mechanisms in liberal society, which isn’t “corruption” so much as the explicit intention of the design (why is there a Senate?).

    • Mardoniush [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Democratic Socialism is flawed because it attempts to enact change under an economic dictatorship, the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie. They hold all the factories, all the gun makers, all the money flow, all the software and telecommunications and electricity and water.

      And so in order to enact Socialism you need to take those things away from the Bourgeoisie. This is what Communists really mean about establishing the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. It’s not just political control by the workers, it’s economic control. And unfortunately you can’t vote your way to that if those who have economic control don’t want you to.