this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
216 points (97.8% liked)

Asklemmy

48585 readers
733 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Does it even make a difference? Would much appreciate some suggestions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] for_some_delta@beehaw.org -5 points 3 days ago (3 children)

The ideas that domination is the goal are correct. The domination goes beyond social issues. Owing someone rent puts them in a position to dominate me. Saying the rent is the people's rent doesn't rationalize the domination.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Marxists do not seek "domination" of others, nor do Socialist countries extract "rent." Using a portion of the social fund to create infrastructure, social safety nets, advance productivity via new Capital, and more are not the same as a landlord extracting surplus value on the basis of owning a scarce resource like land. I think you're confused on several areas, like what Marxists want, how Socialist states function, and what "rent" is. If you want, I have theory I can recommend for you.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 days ago

Saying the rent is the people’s rent

Well that's a strawman that nobody says

[–] KimBongUn420@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 days ago

What no theory does to a mf