Goddess of madness and rebirth. Excrucian Strategist. Capitalised They/Them. Anarcho-Antireal theorist.

Join !soulism if you like My takes.

  • 233 Posts
  • 3.85K Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 14th, 2026

help-circle
  • Yeah, because of negative stereotypes about people with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. NPD is a disability, and I don’t really agree with using the names of disabilities as insults either. I don’t think there are any unproblematic ways to use the word “narcissistic” to describe controlling people.

    That’s why I coined the term “theseistic”. Theseus abandoned the woman who helped him kill the minotaur alone on an island so he could go kidnap 12 year old Helen of Troy and marry her. Theseus deserves the hate, and his name isn’t associated with any disabilities. So it’s a completely unproblematic word that fulfills the same function people use the ableist word for. I think everyone should switch over to the new one.






  • Grail@multiverse.soulism.nettomemes@lemmy.worldUnemployed vs Employed
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Reality is a social construct defined by the dominant ethnic group in society, and manipulated by the Epstein class to control our minds.

    If you look at successful communist cultures, like in Australia, the nature of the world isn’t considered quite as objective as it is in the cultural West.

    I propose that the belief in objectivity correlates with capitalism for a reason: It is easier to accept an imperfect world when we are taught to believe that it was created by immutable, objective truths. Once we accept that everything is subjective, we begin wanting to remake our culture in a more equitable way. Thus, communism.

    I also suspect that Russia and China failed to achieve communism, and instead created state capitalism, because the people didn’t question their capitalist worldviews. Cultural ways of knowing were seen as objective, which lead to stagnation.





  • Okay so this is gonna blow most modern people’s minds, but:

    According to David Graeber, in the mediaeval age most adults owned their own means of production. The land belonged to the local lord and you paid taxes on it, but you owned the tools and you had a kind of ownership of the land, cause feudalism is hierarchies of land ownership.

    Let’s say you’re a farmer. As a youth, you’ll go and work as a farmhand or a milkmaid on a more experienced farmer’s farm. When you become sufficiently experienced, you’ll marry. The wife’s family gives the husband a bunch of money, and he uses it to buy his own farm. Then he takes on farmhands and milkmaids.

    Ever heard of a masterwork? An apprentice artisan, like a blacksmith or a painter, needs to make a masterwork as their final graduation project, and then they become a master, and they’re expected to get their own studio/forge.

    During the industrial revolution when people started doing wage labour, for other people, as a full career, it had social consequences. People felt like they were perpetually trapped in adolescence. Because you never got to own your own means of production.

    So Marx is saying, we used to all get private property as we grow older (well, men used to). But now 90% of us are wage labourers, we’re never going to have enough private property to get by. Even if you’re, say, a digital artist, you’re probably working on a painting app rented from a corporation, you don’t own it. You don’t own your advertising, you don’t own your distribution, you don’t own your payment processing, you don’t own the house or office you work in.

    That didn’t used to be the case. 300 years ago, if you were a man artist, you’d work your way up to having your own atelier and do business face to face with your clients. Now they’re charging us rent for everything. That’s what Marx is saying.





  • Grail@multiverse.soulism.netto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonedon't give them a rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Tankies? Those arseholes will never manage to get rid of capitalism. They couldn’t get rid of capitalism in Russia, and they still haven’t got rid of it in China. An elite class of billionaires still own the means of production, because tankies can’t do shit to improve the world.

    Anarchists are one of the only groups with a track record of successfully implementing communism. We did it in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil war, and we’ll do it again. The other group is Indigenous people.