• invalidusernamelol [he/him]
    hexbear
    24
    3 months ago

    If he's managing to provide a living for 4 people and those people are in a situation where they don't feel exploited, I don't really see how what he's doing is why different than say Pravda pre-revolution, or any number of other communist newspapers/periodicals over the years that until the revolution had to support their workers through wages and sales of a product.

    I mean, Marx was only able to write Capital because Engles had money from profiting off the labor of others. How is this any worse than that?

    • ikilledtheradiostar [comrade/them, love/loves]
      hexbear
      14
      3 months ago

      he's managing to provide a living for 4 people

      Quit being a lib. Those 5 people are providing the living. If he is extracting profits from them then they are exploited. Full stop.

      I support secondthought i can also understand why its not perfect. This is the critical support.

      • invalidusernamelol [he/him]
        hexbear
        8
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Those people are providing a living for themselves, all I'm saying is that working with someone on a project where they're very involved and you're all passionate about it and you don't have to balance that with another full time job is nice.

        Until the workers come out and say that they feel that JT is exploiting them or using them this whole relationship seems to be fine compared to the alternative of working for a company that directly seeks to exploit you to the maximum extent.

        I'm sure cooperative ownership isn't out of the question for this project, but there isn't really much money in communist propaganda so it's amazing that they're able to support 4 salaries doing it.

      • D61 [any]
        hexbear
        6
        3 months ago

        But if you're doing the work, its not profit, its pay right?

        • Galli [comrade/them]
          hexbear
          4
          3 months ago

          it's 5 people's work, if JT receives a greater share of the surplus due to being the owner than he would if they were all equal partners then he is exploiting the other workers. It's the relationship of him as the owner and them as the employees that matters here.

          • D61 [any]
            hexbear
            1
            3 months ago

            Sure. Though I suppose somebody could just ask JT directly the how's and why's. Not as a "gotcha!" but as an explainer on how to set up something like this in a capitalist hellscape.

            But should any of this change my opinions about JT or Second Thought or The Deprogram? Its not a big enough sin for me.

    • @novibe@lemmy.ml
      hexbear
      5
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Feeling exploited is not the issue… or do you think if every worker had the same conditions of Facebook employees everything would be fine? If that’s the case you are not a communist, but a social democrat.

      Also hilarious for a leftist to say an employer is PROVIDING a living to their workers. When all value is produced by the workers. JT is not giving anyone the privilege of a job, he is exploiting the labor of others. That is a technical idea within capitalism, not a moral one. Exploitation is not “evil” is just how capitalism works.

      And paying salaries and selling a product are not “capitalism”. It’s the structure of the business, the owners and laborers.

      And like I said, if you are born to privilege, giving it up for “the cause” is stupid. It’s better to use the privilege to forward the cause. Like Engels. But striving and fighting to BECOME part of the owner class as a communist is nonsensical, unless being a communist is just a grift for you.