By that I mean no alienating tech like Tiktok and such, strong middle class, normal seasons/no worry of climate crisis, general optimism about the future etc. etc.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 hours ago

    The good life of the 80s?

    well, OP seems to be a healthy white straight male in his 20s, otherwise they definitely wouldn’t comment this.

    • CazzoneArrapante@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      Italiano
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Uuuuuugh, again, I repeat: NO CLIMATE CRISIS AND CHEAPER LIVING MAKE THE 80S A BETTER TIME

      • Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 hour ago

        1981 interest rates: 18%.
        1980s homicide rate 10.2/100000, today: 6.3/100000
        (Violent crime follows this trend)

        Lead. Lead everywhere

        • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 hour ago

          And asbestos. I work in hazardous materials and the amount of things that had asbestos in them is terrifying.

          Asbestos carpets, and asbestos-structured paint for fucks sake. Imagine how many peoppe sanded down asbestos paint…

  • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    You can’t. Capitalism has decayed, trying to move the clock backwards is where fascism comes from. That’s why fascism is reactionary, it’s an alliance of the Petite Bourgeoisie and Bourgeoisie against rising leftist sentiment among the Proletariat and Lumpenproletariat.

    Trying to struggle backwards against the historical development of the Mode of Production in society is reactionary, Capitalism moves towards large monopolist syndicates which makes itself ripe for siezure and public ownership, ie socialization. Even if you successfully broke up monopolies, they would trend towards the same point we are at now.

    Additionally, it was quite terrible for ethnic minority groups (still is), gender/sexual minority groups, women, etc., and this was in the context of trying to prevent a worker revolution similar to what happened in the USSR. The social safety nets were better so it was harder to look at universal free healthcare and education in the USSR and believe they had it better, with the fall of the USSR safety nets quickly eroded in the US.

    Now, to escape this hellish landscape, we need to move forward, not backward, and that means progressing to Socialism. The way forward is via revolution, which starts with organizing. Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement.

    The 2 best orgs in the US are Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) and the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL). Pick one you like and is active near you! If you have any theory questions, I can make recommendations for a reading list, or answer directly to the best of my abilities. I’m no theory master or anything, but I consider myself decently well-read, with over 2 dozen books across Marxism and Marxism-Leninism under my belt, so I’m no slouch.

    • oessessnex@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I have two questions.

      1. After the revolution, how to you prevent the people that were influential during the revolution from seizing power for themselves, becoming the new bourgeoisie. This happened time and time again in practice.

      2. Even in the best case scenario, the decisions on what to produce become centralized in the hands of politicians. Political systems that we tried so far don’t work that well in practice. Is this really the best solution?

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        13 minutes ago
        1. After the revolution, how to you prevent the people that were influential during the revolution from seizing power for themselves, becoming the new bourgeoisie. This happened time and time again in practice.

        This hasn’t happened “time and time again in practice.” What do you mean by a “new bourgeoisie?” How familiar are you with Marxism? You may want to read the book Blackshirts and Reds for clarifying and contextualizing the myriad successes and failures of AES states historically.

        1. Even in the best case scenario, the decisions on what to produce become centralized in the hands of politicians. Political systems that we tried so far don’t work that well in practice. Is this really the best solution?

        Again, please elaborate. Centralization is a natural consequence of market-based systems over time, therefore Marxists see central planning of public property to be the next phase in Mode of Production. Marxism isn’t about trying to force a new society, but moving along the natural progression in Mode of Production.

        AES states have not been perfect, but they have dramatically improved on previous systems. I think a good intro to the process of historical development would be reading the short essay Why do Marxists fail to bring about the “Worker’s Paradise?” You seem to believe Socialism to be something that can be implemented by decree, by fiat, rather than something that forms over time. The laws of a system depend on the Mode of Production, the capacity for democratization increases alongside centralization and increases in the productive forces. This process is why Marx says the bourgeoisie produces “more than anything, its own gravediggers.”

        I’d recommend reading the second link before the first, the second article gets to the heart of your issues and takes around 20 minutes, the first link is a full book and is generally a good read, not as immediately relevant.

    • Achyu@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Can I ask a doubt?
      Bourgeoisie, Petite Bourgeoisie, Proletarait & Lumpenproletariat

      What would be simpler terms(or brief 3-5 word plain language explanations) for those?
      Ultra rich wealth/land hoarders/exploiters, Their immediate managers, facilitators and upper mid-level wealth/land hoarders, Average workers & Average people who are dissatisfied?

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        Bourgeoisie - Capital Owners, doesn’t need to labor to survive

        Petite Bourgeoisie - Small Capital Owners, must labor to survive

        Proletariat - Workers, sell their labor power to survive and own little to no Capital

        Lumpenproletariat - criminals, sex workers, the scorned laborers of society

      • The_sleepy_woke_dialectic [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        I think the established socialist terms are best, even if they require further explanation because our definition and understanding of “class” is the distinction between us and your average Republican. It’s the definition from which our entire understanding of politics flows. To a Republican “class” is a series of virtues you signal, self reliance by having a pickup truck, being a hard worker by having working man boots and not being college educated. A petit- or bourgeois man born with a silver spoon in his mouth can still be happily brought into the fold of “working class” so long as they get their hands dirty and don’t talk like “the liberal elite”.

        To a Marxist, “class” is based on whether you have an exploitative or exploited relationship to production.

      • Erika3sis [she/her, xe/xem]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        So you’re certain that revolution is impossible, but you’re also certain that if there is a “strong middle class” in the future, that you would actually be a part of it?

        • CazzoneArrapante@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          Italiano
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Maybe you don’t understand that there isn’t simply any future to speak of at the moment.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 hours ago

            With libs like you? Sadly, you might be right. You’ll whine about the world ending as you refuse to lift a finger to stop it.

            In the dark times, should the stars also go out?

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        That’s like saying you can keep heating up water and have it never boil. Disparity is rising, revolution is already happening around the world. Capitalism is continuing to decay. Revolution is inevitable as long as climate collapse or World War 3 don’t end us first. It is the duty of Leftists to organize so that this revolution can be guided by revolutionary theory and not result in barbarism or fascism.

  • phanto@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    There are a lot of problems, but there are a lot of things we aren’t worrying about now, either. AIDS was killing millions, and there was no treatment. The Satanic Panic. People were exposed to lead and asbestos everywhere. Duck and cover drills in schools for when the nukes went off. I mean, we’re all scrambling to figure out how to stop climate disasters, but then they were scrambling to stop some nutter on either side from pushing a button and ending the world! Where I come from, they still took kids away from their parents for the crime of being Aboriginal! Things change.

    I choose to be optimistic. All through the twentieth century, overpopulation and mass famine were looming spectres, and better crops, phosphate fertilizers, falling birthdates all led to us not really being that worried about that. Read Stand on Zanzibar.

    Crime rates are down all over the world.

    The inequality? 1920’s. The FTC and the EU are (finally, IMO) taking big tech to task for their monopolistic behaviour. It’s moving slow, but there is starting to be the political will to address the challenges.

    Things go in cycles.

    • CazzoneArrapante@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      Italiano
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 hours ago

      There are a lot of problems, but there are a lot of things we aren’t worrying about now, either. AIDS was killing millions, and there was no treatment. The Satanic Panic. People were exposed to lead and asbestos everywhere. Duck and cover drills in schools for when the nukes went off. I mean, we’re all scrambling to figure out how to stop climate disasters, but then they were scrambling to stop some nutter on either side from pushing a button and ending the world! Where I come from, they still took kids away from their parents for the crime of being Aboriginal! Things change.

      Yeah, because that risk doesn’t exist anymore…