this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2026
563 points (99.5% liked)

Memes of Production

1109 readers
1131 users here now

Seize the Memes of Production

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kacarott@aussie.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I posted about my doubts about a concept due to scalability. Was your response to that not an argument for why scalability need not be a concern? Maybe I misunderstood it.

Also, your condescension is unnecessary. You don't know how long I've been thinking about something.

In what way does capitalism require moving close to your job? The line between want and need in these situations is very thin. They need to work, and they want to not spend much of their day commuting. If they didn't have to work at all they might prefer to live elsewhere, but in a world where they do have to work, they would rather live closer to work. Though afaik abolishing capitalism does not mean abolishing the need to work (though it would greatly reduce the amount of work)

For universities and recreation you seem to be saying it is not necessary to live in a city to access, which I agree with, but it's irrelevant. The fact is that people still do live in cities because they want to live closer to university, or they want to have access to a wide variety of recreational activities. Even without a profit motive, having a large number of people nearby is a good reason to build recreational centres, and having access to a wide range of recreational activities is still a good motivation to live in a place. On top of this, many dense population centres are around natural sources of recreation which cannot be simply built elsewhere, like beaches, mountains, rivers, lakes, etc.

You don't have to convince me that cities as they exist now are generally terrible, I totally agree with you. But evidently a huge number of people still think it is worth living in cities, and if cities/ high population centres in general still exist even without capitalism, then the scalability of a system is still very much a valid concern, no?

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago

Ya. Some of the problems we encounter are a result of civilization and not just capitalism. Not that the effects of either are to be diminished.