Cowbee [he/they]

The overwhelming majority of Marxist-Leninists support the USSR, but don’t feel that it was a paradise nor free from mistake, including in the era of Stalin. The hammer and sickle is associated with Marxism-Leninism, and the various Marxist-Leninist parties, groups, and countries around the world.

The hammer and sickle is a symbol of Marxism-Leninism, though, the hammer being for the proletariat and sickle for the peasantry. This is just kinda silly

Sure, but the vast majority of Marxists globally are Marxist-Leninists, and Lemmy’s makeup reflects that.

They have a Socialist Market Economy, they never abandoned Socialism, just course-corrrected from losing sight of Materialism and trying to achieve Communism through fiat, rather than by builsing up the productive forces.

There’s going to be Marxists on Lemmy, the lead developers of the software are Marxist-Leninists and some of the largest instances are explicitly Socialist-aligned.

Hey, real quick, nobody thinks the Russian Federation is somehow still Marxist, the Soviet Union was dissolved in the 90s and Marxism went with it. Further, China is not a “Utopia,” it is Marxist-Leninist but it’s in the early stages of Socialism, and the Russian Federation is far worse off under Capitalism.

If you want to correct your blurb, that would be far more accurate.

Just want to add, the CPC is Marxist and is working off of Marxist economics. Their party ideology is Marxism-Leninism Xi Jinping Thought, which is Marxism-Leninism applied to modern China’s conditions and under Xi Jinping.

Now, that doesn’t mean it’s some Utopia, and that also doesn’t mean it’s a far-future Communist society, just that they are in the early stages of Socialism.

The US intentionally leaving the organizations they have domination over as a means to exert soft power globally would certainly be good for weakening the US Empire. This seems like a case where the architects of Empire failed to raise successors and as such the ones with the reigns are now “true believers” in the architects’ web of lies.

Enshittification is built-in to Capitalism, the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall forces it. FOSS and whatnot is safe.

It’s noticeable, and even reduces ghosting and motion blur.

Please don’t use “rape” as a casual negative verb, there are better, more accurate words to use that don’t needlessly reference SA.

“This rejection of profit and ownership made by a self-admitted leftist is actually completely in line with for-profit individual ownership just because AnCaps don’t murder people for doing charity”

You’re just trying to be contrarion for the sake of it, lmao. Again, the article was showcasing examples of gift economies and how Anarcho-Communism would function, and Linux fits that definition. It wasn’t arguing that Linux is Anarcho-Communism itself. It is not an example of how Anarcho-Capitalism would function, as Anarcho-Capitalism is Capitalism, and FOSS is decidedly anticapitalist, even if said Capitalists wouldn’t murder Linus for rejecting Capitalism.

You’re again being needlessly contrarion, Anarcho-Capitalists don’t advocate for setting up networks of mutual aid and FOSS software, they don’t care about gift economies either. Using Linux as an example for AnCapistan would get you laughed out of the room, if calling yourself an AnCap didn’t already result in that.

I’m done, this is pointless.

No.

Your argument is that because FOSS would be permissible in AnCap society, FOSS being fundamentally constructed upon AnCom principles of rejecting Capitalism and centralization in favor of decentralized and collectively owned and distributed property makes it not in line with Anarcho-Communism.

When the article is giving an example of how Anarcho-Communism would work, Linux is a fantastic example. Nobody is saying Linux is Anarcho-Communism, or that Linux cannot exist within broader contexts, but that in an Anarcho-Communist society, the structure of Linux and FOSS would be the common structure.

You’re being contrarion for the sake of it.

Regardless of what AnCaps argue, the fundamental fact is that Anarchy is a rejection of hierarchy, whereas Private Property itself requires both the Owner/Worker hierarchy, and a monopoly on violence that cannot be reasonably contested to uphold Private Property protections. As such, it can only be considered Libertarian, as it both maintains hierarchy and maintains some semblance of at minimum a nightwatchman state.

As for Left/Right, the standard definition is Collective/Individual ownership of the Means of Production, not necessarily collectivism/individualism or lib/auth. Individual ownership by definition is supporting rulers, the larger Capitalists are effectively no different from a Feudal state.

Sharing being allowed does not mean FOSS aligns with AnCap principles, that’s like saying bagel consumption is AnCap.

FOSS isn’t simply “sharing” either, it’s quite literally a rejection of Individual ownership and creating IP for the collective to use, fork, maintain, and distribute as they see fit. It isn’t a coincidence that FOSS enthusiasts overwhelmingly lean left, just like Lemmy tends to.

Anarcho-Capitalism isn’t a thing, it’s just Libertarian Capitalists LARPing with Leftist aesthetics. The very rejection of individual ownership rejects Capitalism, it’s like saying Worker Co-operatives are an example of Capitalism because markets tend to not care what makes them up.

Just because FOSS would be “allowed” in Capitalism doesn’t mean it’s an example of Capitalist principles.