POG Politics Thread Version 3

I no longer hold democracy as any kind of ideal. In every case, it is simply a mask worn by the Capitalist class. The consent of the governed is an illusion.

Liberal Democracy is the womb of Fascism.

isn't democracy a cure for this?

or are you saying you just have no hope that a democracy can exist?

also I heard an interesting thought on a podcast this morning....

Nazis were the anti communist leaders of the world. but after the communists killed the Nazis(the Russians killed them far more than USA did), then USA took in the Nazis, and took up the mantle as the new anti communist leaders of the world.

mark was probably listening to the same podcast

I think I'm saying that any democracy will necessarily tend toward fascism because of multiple factors. I guess the most obvious is propaganda. I'm still thinking about it.

I'm having a hard time analyzing the concept of democracy outside the concept of Capitalism. Are you saying a Capitalist society could enfranchise workers if it's a true democracy?

Fascism existed outside of Nazi Germany. America (and the rest of the world) didn't import it from them, Hitler didn't invent anything new.

I think democracy and capitalism can coexist. It does require that public institutions maintain power over capital, and not the other way around. I am optimistic that that is possible, though really, really hard.

Reversing the trend and creating strong institutions after they've been weakened is harder, and likely bloody.

no I'm saying capitalism is anti democratic... at least I think I said that? that's what I meant.

capitalism destroys democracy.

my guess is that the only lasting actual democracy can exist in a society that is not capitalist.

democracy's biggest leak is that people suck. like no getting around that really. unless maybe humans are actually intrensically good, and just need education, love, safety, community, and then we can all be kind, or at least just to each other

are you saying that capitalism is anti democratic? and that the only way they can co exist is if you have anti capitalist mechanisms to try and preserve democracy?

the anti capitalist mechanisms being public institutions that are more powerful than capitalist institutions

if I understand what you're saying, it sounds like unchecked capitalism will destroy democracy

I guess to me it seems like it boils down to rich people thinking "I'm worth more than poor people. I deserve more. I'm more powerful. our votes are not equal. we are not equal. I'm better. I want my big house and cushy life"

Humans are intrensically animals who respond to their material conditions.

I think I want to separate capitalism from extreme wealth. Capitalism can be equalizing, under circumstances that redistribute wealth. Extreme wealth leads to a kind of feudalism, except it's not the divine right of kings, it's money leading to an overly privileged position.

hmmm.... you might be right about that.

when I initially said "rich" I meant like pretty much anyone who doesn't struggle to pay bills. so I didn't mean extreme wealth necessarily. I just thought the extremely wealthy felt the same things, only more extremely.

but maybe this 100k-5 million a year class would be mostly benign if it wasn't for extreme wealth pulling the strings.

but also if you eliminate extreme wealth from capitalism, then it's not capitalism anymore, right?

good point. I have a lower opinion of humans than other animals. and I should give humans more credit(or other animals less credit). I think maybe dogs are so good, and my relationships with dogs colors my opinions of other animals.

cats are awful btw. at least personally i've never had a good relationship with a cat

I know it's racist.

filthy, with all due respect, your ideas are incoherent. I would rethink all your basic assumptions, every single one.

Also I'm pretty sure you'll learn to love cats if you're forced to spend time with a cool one.

I've never had a bad relationship with a cat. There is a cat in my lap right now.

you're probably right about the cats.

and im pretty sure my posts are incoherent. but i don't think my ideas are. at least not right now. just wish i could communicate lol

but like basically in pre school we are taught to share, take turns, respect each other, etc... like fundamentals of living in a community, a co operative. capitalism is opposed to that. it's exploitative. it's competitive. it's predatory.

Yes the ideas are called Social Democracy and it's what American Liberals believe in. And it's exactly what I'm questioning.

American was there. Massive social care system, super high marginal tax rates. And now we're here.

yeah I guess like the new deal. except that was for white people. and also depended largely on the huge foundation of wealth from stolen land, and slave labor

and was also hell bent on crushing the evil Russian revolution

Filthy I think you have a core basic error in your philosophy. Wealth isn't is a zero sum game. The rich grow the economy, make more money, inject more money into business and jobs. They help the poor become less poor.

I won't make a habit of this but I ain't got time to write all this out so I had ChatGPT do it:

Let’s dismantle this statement piece by piece:

“Wealth isn’t a zero-sum game.”
Partially true in abstract, but misleading in practice. While economic growth can expand the overall pie, who controls the slices matters. Wealth generation under capitalism often relies on exploitation, rent-seeking, or enclosure of common resources (land, data, labor). For example, skyrocketing executive pay often coincides with wage stagnation and job precarity for workers. Growth doesn’t negate the fact that wealth accumulates disproportionately in fewer hands.

⸻

“The rich grow the economy, make more money, inject more money into business and jobs.”
This assumes trickle-down economics, which has been empirically discredited. Studies from the IMF, OECD, and even mainstream economists show that wealth concentration stifles growth. The rich don’t “inject” capital out of generosity—they invest for returns, often in financial instruments, real estate bubbles, or stock buybacks, not in hiring or wage increases. Much of the wealth generated today is extractive, not productive.

⸻

“They help the poor become less poor.”
This is ahistorical and patronizing. The reduction in global poverty has been driven not by the rich helping the poor, but by labor struggles, social programs, decolonization, and public investment. When the rich do “help,” it’s often via philanthropy that dodges taxes, launders reputations, and reinforces hierarchy. Systemic improvements come from collective redistribution, not billionaire beneficence.

⸻

Final Blow

The statement is an ideological cover for class power, designed to neutralize critique. It romanticizes capital accumulation while erasing the real structural violence that generates inequality: wage theft, austerity, debt, land grabs, and ecological plunder. The rich don’t lift the poor—they stand on their backs.

Or should I say ComradeGPT

😆

yeah what comrade skynet said

Grok disagrees!

https://x.com/i/grok/share/APnRAzx7iTxTT...

Scroll a 1/3 of the way down. I don't know how to clip my earlier stuff.