• TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Where is your objection? She formed her philosophy after experiencing a collectivist dystopia. Her family’s business was nationalised. That is part and parcel of such extreme collectivist socio-economics and thus enamoured by hyperindividualist extreme counterpart.

    • Kayel@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Dystopia in her experience. The peasants going to uni would have had a different perspective.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Her family’s business was nationalised.

      Lol! The US nationalizes stuff all the damn time - Obama essentially nationalized the auto industry after the 2008 crash (right before handing it back to the billionaire parasites after their debt had been shouldered by the US people).

      Yet I don’t see anybody calling the US “collectivist.”

        • masquenox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s only relevant if you insist on calling the US military “collectivist” - will you be attempting to make such an argument or not?

          If you don’t, your attempt to conflate nationalization with collectivization falls flat on it’s face - so get on with it.

          • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            The military can be argued “collectivist”. I’ve never been in the military but many vets say that in the bootcamp they pretty much remove the personality out of you so that you think with the team and follow chain of command. And often, teams are punished based on the mistakes of one person in the group.

            And to you, define “collectivism”.

      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s because they handed it back, so everyone can see we are obviously an individualist kleptocracy. The US government should have imminent domained automakers instead of giving them billions of dollars in loans and then forgiving a good chunk of the loan.

        Wealthy investors siphon as much money from the system as they can. Then, when there is the slightest economic turmoil, the government gives them billions or trillions in handouts. Why aren’t they required to reinvest the windfall from their previous years into their own companies when they fail? That math doesn’t add up.