this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
100 points (100.0% liked)

196

18015 readers
665 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schmorpel@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Smaller groups of humans (villages, households, ...?) could decide among themselves whether they prefer to live together by capitalist or communist principles. These smaller groups could function within a larger federation - a bit like the fediverse with its smaller instances where each can decide their own internal rules.

[–] toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

yeah, thats probably a really unstable combination, as the internal logic of capitalism requires infinite growth, so the capitalist parts will be strongly incentivised to expand into and consume the communist parts.

But maybe different kinds of socialist communities could federate like this?

[–] Rozauhtuno@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

That's roughly the idea of Anarchism, Democratic Confederalism, and how the Zapatistas govern themselves. But they're all anti-capitalist.