Found this graph online for anyone who might still be confused. I think this makes it much more clear.

  • yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    14 hours ago

    What you define is segregation : a society where progress benefits me, but not you, because you are different.

    • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      12 hours ago

      What i define is how most actually socialist or communist countries of the past were organized though. See for example the GDR, socially just as conservative as most other countries at the time; to the point that the formerly GDR part of germany is now a breeding ground for far right political power.

      My point is not that socially conservative ideas have merit, but that they are not inherently ideologically incompatible with wanting a not-capitalist economy. And that we do ourselves little good by constantly falling back into the old leftist trope of never being able to achieve political power because everyone only agrees on like, 90% of issues.

      • yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        You are mixing a lot of things here : capitalist vs anti capitalist regime is not this same as progressive/conservative politics.

        If you believe social progress should benefit only you and not me, you are not progressive.

        And I’d like to point out that all regimes you mention are not different from any other : they all had a ruling class. This is, again, not progressive.

        And as I pointed out in an other comment: studies suggest that Totalitarianism is not about left or right, because they use the same concepts to validate their ideologies.