There’s clearly a lean to the left side of things in Lemmy instances, with many people attacking people at the right.

In some cases regarding the climate crisis, there’s people blaming it on capitalism while hinting that communism/socialism are the solution to the climate crisis, because somehow having the state controlling the entire economy will lead to stop CO2 emissions.

A bit from the article:

The best way to protect the environment is to get rich. That way, there is enough money not only to meet the needs of ordinary people, but also to pay for cleaner power plants and better water-treatment facilities. Since capitalism is the best way to create wealth, humanity should stick with it.

Not the first time I’ve heard about this concept, and the more i look into the world the more I agree with it. Being green is kind of a luxury that not many people can afford, and the poorer people are the less they can afford green technology.

    • what_is_a_name@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      Sounds like your definition of “socialism” is (like Cato’s) “a state that is easy to criticise”. ACS did are some of the most socialist governments. They are clever about it for sure but that is why they are so inconvenient. Hell look as Norway socialising profits a from oil exploration to lift an entire nation out of poverty.

    • psud@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      1 year ago

      You what, mate? They’re among the most socialist nations in the world, more so than Argentina or China

        • psud@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          1 year ago

          You are using a cold war definition of socialism. It’s outdated

          Socialism isn’t the opposite of democracy

          Socialism is what social democracies do.

        • Sl00k@programming.devEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          Your wiki links first sentence says it’s within socialism which would make them socialist.

          Social democracy is a political, social, and economic philosophy within socialism

          • psud@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            1 year ago

            Funnily enough Wikipedia’s entry for Saudi Arabia doesn’t use socialism anywhere in it, and Venezuela only has “socialist” in political party names

            I wonder if to be socialist you need to implement social policies for the benefit of the people rather than for the benefit of the government (by preventing revolt)