So what you’re basically saying is that real capitalism has never been tried, right

This was posted as a meme? Lmao tragic.

Meme aside, addressing the title, no shit Sherlock,

Lemmy was created by a Marxist Leninist, nicknamed "Dessalines", after a revolutionary Haitian leader who even went so far as to slaughter the remaining French colonists, to destroy any remnants of colonialism

If you're reading this, search up his Github account and you will find upon many essays on Socialism...

*Me saying a fairy tale scenario that will not exist under capitalism.

*Reality standing behind me.

You can't and wont deliver a long term solution for "middle class" people by working within that system. The goal of capital is ultimately to have as few as people as possible, with as much power as possible. Any middle class you are talking about will become lower class and poverty class with enough time. It absurd that you can look at the current system and believe that it would ever deliver on your promise. Believing that it would work with an uncorrupt government is trying to say that there is an "ideal" version of capitalism out there and we just need to do that.

You are looking at the only version of capitalism that exists. Any regulations, safeguards, and safety nets will be corrupted and withered away eventually because the people and institutions that supposedly uphold these ideals will be rewarded for doing so. You create a competitive class system and you are shocked and outraged when people cash it out to gain, or maintain their social class to avoid becoming lower class.

Maybe reality just has a leftist bias. Why should the truth be dead at the center?

Why do you want a middle class? So you have a class to aspire to and a class to denigrate? Why do you want classes?!

"uncorrupt government"

😂😂😂

Lemmy has had a huge bias towards seize-the-means-of-production socialism from day 1, which is very important in understanding why it's different from other reddit clones, and why it has unique features and anti-features. The political orientation is not incidental, it's vital, and I'm glad to see it hasn't completely died from the sudden influx of reddit-natives when the API thing happened.

I agree! Let me know when you find an uncorrupt government or uncorrupt corporation.

Capitalism is not "when you have markets." I totally agree that it's important to have well regulated markets. But capitalism perverts democracy with bribery and lobbying. Democratic Socialism is when you have a democratic government and a democratic economy.

Honestly, I think capitalism wouldn't be so bad if it was limited to what it's good at. Fashion, tech, entertainment, snacks, ect.

But essential food, housing, water, healthcare, even electricity and internet access, the idea that these things that will always have infinite demand is haphazardly controlled through profit motive is disgusting.

Infrastructures should be government controlled and free. Essential resources should have some sort of universal basic "food stamps" system. Then actual money just becomes the luxury "fun bucks" that you don't lose out on if you don't have a lot. For example pet owners would be given a credits for pet food and free vet care, but a silly pet costume would use money.

Disclaimer: This is just a personal idea I've been mulling over, I'm sure there's a million holes in it.

The existence of the middle class with many wealthy means you have to have a lot of people in poverty. If not liking that makes me left wing then so be it

The problem is that a middle class, can only be a middle class if it's in between an upper class and a lower class. It's in the name: MIDDLE class.

The statement in the image is just loaded with terminology that comes with a lot of baggae. It's no surprise people tear into it. Can't speak to whether that makes them leftist or just poly sci students.

"Uncorrupt" misunderstands the nature of corruption. How do you envision resolving the interests of the forces that give validity to said government while still keeping a capitalist structure?

"Generate wealth" presupposes a specific kind of wealth created by the government and given validity by the capitalist structure. You win at the rules of the game you made up. "Middle class" has a similar problem. "Prosperity" to a nation starving under the global capitalist regime might look quite different. Why use one benchmark over the other? Because of the game you want to choose.