for context: i support a cross between market socialism, welfarism and georgism under a party-union/minarchist government (a small-enough government where the political parties work with the unions). i think that minarchism is a required step in a democratic dictatorship of the proletariat.

my socialist views are therefore a fusion of libertarian market socialism and de leonism and such.

  • DylanMc6 [any, any]@hexbear.netBannedOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 days ago
    1. i DON’T mean capitalists; when i say ‘industrialists’, i was thinking industrial workers (like factory workers, for example).
    2. a true government should be limited enough for enforcing and administrating, but also big enough to handle the economy and military - in other words, a small-to-medium government.
    • starkillerfish [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 days ago
      1. industrialists means capitalists, owners of industry / factories. this is the accepted english definition.
      2. i understand, you have said that before. but you have not explained why this limit exists or what “small” or “medium” government size mean. how they are measured. by amount of public servants? budget? paperwork? no matter what limit you put, it would be nonsensical in any scenario.
      • DylanMc6 [any, any]@hexbear.netBannedOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        i think the state should be downsized to enforcing and administrating - small enough to handle all that, but the state should NOT be the most important thing in a government - that would be the parties working with the union. seriously!

        • starkillerfish [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          i am not going to continue with this conversation because you have not actually engaged with anyone’s good faith comments. you have only been reiterating over and over again your positions. me and other commenters have asked you questions not because we don’t understand what de leonism is, but because we want you to question your beliefs.

          to come back to the original question of your post, the reason why nobody on this website is de leonist is because it is not a practical ideology and does not have relation to real life organising. All actually existing socialists states come from the marxist-leninist tradition. I will also give credit to anarchists who have been able to organise on a local/regional level, even though I disagree with the potential scalability.

          This is why one of the first things I ever replied to you was to join any socialist (or even better, communist) organisation if you want to improve your understanding of socialist practice, and then you can form an opinion based on that. not based on a random collection of wikipedia articles.

          i hope i have been clear enough

          • DylanMc6 [any, any]@hexbear.netBannedOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 days ago

            i would join a socialist organization, but i CAN’T go outside without permission, and i CAN’T find any socialist organization that’s entirely online-only - the closest i’ve gotten is signing up for newsletters, sorry.

            instead, i’m looking for any socialist books from any perspective (marx, lenin, stalin, trotsky, de leon, bernstein, luxembourg, anyone!). if you have any recs, please let me know. seriously!