• TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Please don’t post the same thing to multiple communities without crossposting. It isolates discussions, whilst crossposting links and unifies them.

  • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    I get the sentiment but many of these are arguably still very vague.

    Within authoritarianism there lies the question of Authority for whom? Democracy for whom? And to what degree.

    What are Human rights? How do they apply to different social and economic contexts? How do we define barbarism and who do we call barbaric without resorting to colonial lines of thinking that denigrate others who live differently as lesser or sub-human.

    Evidence based v.s. pseudoscientific is a fair one

    What gives the constitution value and how does it hold up to vastly different material conditions from the time in which it was written. Is something unconstitutional inherently wrong?

    Corrupt v.s. fair is decent enough I gusss but a lot of the previous points apply here too. Corrupt for whom? Fair to whom? Etc.

    Sorry for taking the meme too seriously. It is past my bedtime and caffeine is keeping me awake. I’d also like to add that in the historical context “left v.s. right” is the dichotomy in this meme that has the most concrete definition. In the past right v.s. left essentially meant capitalist v.s. anti-capitalist (slightly nebulous but I want to include anarchists here so I won’t say communist) or if you go further back feudalist v.s. capitalist. These are concrete terms that describe specific economic modes of production based on class contradiction. It is unfortunate and likely intentional that the actual meanings of these terms have been obscured.