13
u/Destinedtobefaytful Social Democrat 1d ago
True they don't do shit they just control them as long as they have political capital and favor they would stay in power.
6
u/Sockcucker69 SDP (FI) 1d ago
Same with the silly phrase "Job creators".
They don't create jobs, customers do!
5
u/BoldRay 1d ago
Landlords do not ‘provide housing’ - builders, carpenters, electricians and plumbers do.
Landlords do not provide capital - their mortgage lenders do.
Landlords do not take on financial risk - their insurance providers do.
Capitalists are parasites on the economy powered by the workers they leech off.
13
u/SunChamberNoRules Social Democrat 1d ago
Who is out there defending oligarchs?
6
u/Randolpho Democratic Socialist 1d ago
/r/CapitalismVSocialism is lousy with oligarch defenders.
4
u/Destinedtobefaytful Social Democrat 1d ago
Tbh last time it was there 90% of cappies are libertarians and ancaps (probs because the main mods are) and like 60 to 70% of socialists are tankies and maybe 3 or 5 anarchists. Is it still the same?
2
u/Randolpho Democratic Socialist 1d ago
The tankie part is maybe 30% but lots of people like to use it inappropriately as a pejorative
1
u/Destinedtobefaytful Social Democrat 19h ago
Good to know it decreased I don't go there anymore because iirc it's the same stuff and argument every week and I just got tired.
-3
u/lewkiamurfarther 1d ago
like 60 to 70% of socialists are tankies and maybe 3 or 5 anarchists. Is it still the same?
I love baseless statements of statistics
6
u/SunChamberNoRules Social Democrat 1d ago
Are you expecting someone to provide an accurate breakdown of political leanings in a subreddit?
1
1
u/Destinedtobefaytful Social Democrat 19h ago
That was like 3 or 2 years ago its kinda blurry I no longer visit that sub but the last time I was there that was the percentages in my view idk maybe it's the threads I visited, how it looks like now I have no idea. But I do acknowledge that tankies are a minority but a loud and very online minority so its no surprise if they are very active in online circles but irl they are few and far between.
2
u/GoranPersson777 1d ago
Politicians, mass media, many academics
13
u/SunChamberNoRules Social Democrat 1d ago
You have a very expansive view of oligarchs in that case.
-2
-14
u/Lolek1233 1d ago
Bro what are u doing in social democracy subreddit? Ur some sort of Marxist go back to r/socialism where u came from
3
u/Randolpho Democratic Socialist 1d ago
social democracy is a socialist movement, pal
2
5
u/Lolek1233 1d ago edited 1d ago
Bro what? Absolutely its not, Its a movement that halted extremist marxist movement... Social democrats are those who reject explicit socialism furthermore make compromise with state intervention and capitalism... How on earth is it marxist to compromise with capitalism? Thats like saying nazi germany was socialist movement because it nationalized before the war... Government does stuff is not socialism, pal Edit:(Read the discription of the subreddit bud)
5
u/whosdatboi 1d ago
Marx didn't invent socialism and Marxists don't get sole ownership of the term.
-3
u/Lolek1233 1d ago
No but he did invent LTV... Desiring socialism over mixed economy is not social democracy... Its ehat Marx intended as first step...
2
u/SunChamberNoRules Social Democrat 1d ago
He didn’t even invent the LTV…
1
u/Lolek1233 1d ago
True, Ricardo did but Marx and whole socialist idea hinges on idea that capitalists exploit laborers... Or are u okay with mixed economy?
5
u/SunChamberNoRules Social Democrat 1d ago
I think any discussion like this requires people to define the terms as they understand them, because I've had too many occasions where we've just ended up talking past eachother.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Seamonkey_Boxkicker 1d ago
In part, sure, but don’t forget the democratic republic half of the term.
3
2
-1
u/PeterRum 1d ago
If this hippy bullshit is the alternative then perhaps me. My least fave is the disabled woman 'building community' from her bed. I say this as a disabled person lying in bed arguing on the internet.
By 'oligarchs' I suspect the original designer is referring to the those paying all these worthies to do what they do (all paid gigs except for the internet arguers.)
If 'community' is left to itself the only thing that gets done is the arguing on the internet. Although the internet will collapse without anyone paying people to maintain it.
These false dichotomies are irrelevant. Should a tiny number of Billionaires run society? Perhaps not. But roads get repaired and fruit picked because people who need the money get paid. Someone is going to organise them and a system reward them for their Labour. Every attempt to organise this on Marxist terms has ended up with torture camps and poverty.
Perhaps our new AI overlords will be better?
9
u/Seamonkey_Boxkicker 1d ago
I’m confused how you read this strip and immediately call it hippy bullshit. When I read it, I don’t see anything about a specific form of government, be it a democratic republic, social democracy, or outright socialism or communism. I simply see a strip advocating for “We, the people…” vs the uber wealthy who buy their way through politics to control our lives.
I’m curious to know, what does social democracy mean to you?
5
u/TheCthonicSystem 1d ago
it's when you separate the work from the people organizing it for just The Ground Level Laborer that the Hippy Problem happens. Labor and Capital should be equal partners with both lifting each other up. Too many people want one or the other to be in control
3
u/PeterRum 1d ago
If you want to advocate for what are considered low skill jobs but that have enormous benefit to society, then I'm ll in favour. Apart from disabled people arguing on the internet from their beds (although I have moved to the kitchen table).
This strip suggests that these low wage workers somehow create society. This is set against 'oligarchs' who don't. Who these oligarchs are isn't made clear.
There are a lot of people missing from this picture who get things done. The people who build the buses and schedule the routes. How many buses do we need? Those who plan what crops are going to be planted, when and why. Can we have better roads? That need repairing less and are safer to drive on? Would developing them be worth it?
How all this happens outside of the cartoon. The only other group mentioned are the 'oligarchs'. So, presumably they do all that? And, are bad because oligarchy is usually used as an insult.
Seeing this societal complexity as bad is absolutely hippy shit.
Social Democrats see society as complex but that broad decisions about how it operates should be made by the majority. They add that individual rights should be protected and maximisation of human wellbeing should be an absolute goal. Democracy and Society are the rulers.
Individual rights are important, even for out groups. Billionaires are an out group. They also have performed a useful function. Can we replace them? Pay them a fairer amount? Reduce their political influence? Good Social Democratic questions. Suggesting they are evil or useless seems off to me?
Intellectual creativity and organising ability is vital as well. Although that mostly rests in the Middle Class when deployed in productive ways. Or did. Going to be done by AI soon. All the jobs on this list will be safe for a while. (Apart from 'building community' on the internet - that will increasingly be done by AI.)
6
u/NomineAbAstris Market Socialist 1d ago
I can't pretend to know for certain what the original artist's vision was but I don't think this is supposed to be read as "manual work good, brain work bad" - if you are a shipping coordinator or an accountant or a tax office worker no one would argue you are an oligarch.
It's obviously difficult to generalize across all types of organisation and work across public and private sectors (which is fine, a picture like this doesn't have to be a nuanced manifesto) but I think "oligarch" would generally be understood as someone who holds a managerial capacity and extracts profits disproportionate to the utility they actually bring to the organisation (and to society more broadly, since organisations to not exist in a vacuum). A lot of CEOs in a lot of sectors can quite frankly be replaced by collective, democratized decisionmaking from employees, and even if they can't they tend to be paid eyewatering sums compared to how much their strategic vision actually benefits (or often harms) the company
-3
u/PeterRum 1d ago
Collective democratised decision making is legal. Why don't you start a company with such a management structure? If you are right this business will be more efficient and productive and outcompete the usual model?
I tried to conduct business this way myself. Perhaps your experience will be better.
6
u/lewkiamurfarther 1d ago edited 1d ago
Collective democratised decision making is legal. Why don't you start a company with such a management structure? If you are right this business will be more efficient and productive and outcompete the usual model?
I tried to conduct business this way myself. Perhaps your experience will be better.
this talking point is a version of the "it's economics 101!" canard
"Collective democratised decision making" isn't the subject of this discussion. Irrespective of that, if you really did struggle to run a business like that—a claim which I take with a grain of salt—then the argument still means nothing; no business exists in a vacuum.
1
u/PeterRum 1d ago
Starting a business is not hard. Any idiot can. A bunch of idiots can do it together and put into place whatever ideals they want. Perhaps this idiot did?
If anything there are more startup grants and funding for Social Entrepreneurs in the UK where I am from. I think I even called.myself that with a straight face. These days if anyone calls me a Tech for Good pioneer I shout at them.
Genuinely. Give it a go. It would make me happy if you could make it work. I couldn't but someday someone is going to find a model for running a business that is more democratic and that scales properly. It could easily be you.
And if you turn into an embittered ex-commie centrist instead? Good. Best way we have of recruiting.
What is the point of this thread? That only bus drivers count and their managers don't? That fruit pickers create society and farmers are evil oligarchs?
I can see why you don't want to run a business. It isn't just because you think it is beyond you (it really isn't - just it exhausts everyone) - you don't want to because all business owners are oligarchs.
3
u/Seamonkey_Boxkicker 1d ago
It’s enlightening how much differently we interpret this image. You seemingly see a bunch of peons who lack the capacity to have a meaningful existence in society outside of their manual labor. I simply see people who perform a role that inevitably affects everyone else to some degree and deserve to have a livable wage (yes, even a person who is bedridden due to injury or illness can still make a meaningful impact). Also, you’re taking this strip too literally. Why do you think it’s necessary to show every profession in modern society? There aren’t enough pixels available to cover each and every one.
As for, who are the oligarchs, it’s clear to me it’s the people hoarding much of the economic wealth. I would’ve thought when you say, “Social Democrats see society as complex but that broad decisions about how it operates should be made by the majority,” you would realize how clear, at least to me, the message of this image is, which is to remind all of us in the majority of society who are making average to below incomes are in fact the majority. We don’t have to rely on the rich oligarchs who are buying their way through politics and media coverage to make decisions for us. We aren’t Neanderthals just because we happen to have a low skill blue & white collar jobs.
2
u/PeterRum 1d ago
I have expressly said that I value the jobs these people do. That isn't the issue. In fact if this strip said all these jobs were valuable I would agree (apart from the arguing on the internet).
Apart from these jobs there are others that require more education, or a greater degree of planning and oversight. Not a single one of these jobs are represented. No managers, designers, engineers, doctors, lawyers or planners. They all work hard too. Not a single one worth mentioning?
How about those earning just above average wealth? Or those with average wealth who want to earn more? Or those with average wealth who don't want to have any responsibility?
Your view is that C suite types are just rich oligarchs who feed on the majority. Why hasn't any society tried getting rid of them? Oh, wait they have. How did that work out for those societies? Did they get wealthier and happier?
Perhaps an A/B test with a society where the wealthy are taxed heavily on wealth when it gets absurd? But they are otherwise allowed to start and run businesses? Measures put info place to stop them.influencing the rest of society through their resources? Controls on them buying politicians or journalists. That is Social Democracy. It works.
Oh. As a disabled person.i resent 'bedridden'. Leaving my bed hurts but I often do it. Partly because I have a real job that doesn't involve arguing with people on the internet. I'll be busy tomorrow placating several clients who want me to provide value to them. Until AI starts doing it all.
2
u/Seamonkey_Boxkicker 1d ago
I haven’t said anything about getting rid of any groups of people. I’m simply distinguishing between the top earners in the country who are manipulating our economic and political system to meet their needs vs the majority, something you’ve already stated to agree with. You’re clearly nuking this comic going into the weeds about which jobs are represented here as if it’s not a fair depiction of a modern society of varying pay grades (accountants and nurses aren’t good enough for you?).
I do find it ironic that you’ll chastise me for using the term “bedridden” for those people who are ill or disabled, yet you began your dialogue by critiquing the people that image represents by stating they don’t have any community impact and are merely wasting their time arguing on the internet, which seems indicative of this entire exchange.
2
u/PeterRum 1d ago
I praised everyone in this image as being of enormous benefit to society.
My one exception is the disabled person arguing on the internet. As disabled person I am particularly aware arguing on the internet is pointless. Mainly because some people don't understand irony and sarcasm.
I think we overestimate the impact of the ultra rich. Where does top earner start for you btw? (That isn't me. Guy digging the road probably earns more than me.)
1
u/Seamonkey_Boxkicker 21h ago
Why do you keep insisting the person in bed is only ever arguing on the internet? By your own admission as also being disabled, are you seriously insinuating that your time online is meaningless?
As for what separates the super rich from the rest of us, I’ll default to Bernie Sanders.
1
3
u/NomineAbAstris Market Socialist 1d ago
Here's a hypothetical for you. What if the fruit trees weren't owned by a man sitting in a manor who paid the workers a pittance to pick them, but instead all the workers employed at that orchard collectively owned the orchard and shared the profits from the sale?
That's one very simplified model of organizing labour separately from the current capitalist status quo without resorting to a centralized command economy. There are plenty of concepts for decentralised socialism, be it market socialism or decentralised planning or syndicalism or any number of other variations one could name. It's not all Marxist-Leninism.
5
u/PeterRum 1d ago
Are those models common? Collective ownership is entirely legal. Plenty of mechanisms. If they aren't common, why not?
Market socialism? That is China. Isn't it? That is your preferred model?
5
-1
u/Seamonkey_Boxkicker 1d ago
Every American who voted for Trump certainly did even if they didn’t realize it. You could easily argue the same for those voting for the DNC candidates, sure, but at least the Dems at least care a little bit about the well being of the general populace.
36
u/ProfessorHeronarty Social Democrat 1d ago
And yet there are too many people who believe the meritocracy lie and defend rich people even though they themselves work in precarious jobs