• ZoomeristLeninist [they/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      89
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      landlord-spotted of course theyre a landlord

      “im a pretty left leaning person but i also want to leech off peoples wages and drive up the price of housing”

      oh, how magnanimous of you, barely making a profit. YOU ARE GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY FOR YOUR HOUSE. it’s all profit since it all goes to equity in the houses, maintenance, or straight to their pocket. these scumbags will say anything to make themselves feel better when they know they are despicable

    • BountifulEggnog [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      77
      ·
      1 year ago

      a bare minimum profit

      YOU GET TO KEEP THE HOUSE MOTHERFUCKER. How the hell is “a free house in 30 years” not a shit load of profit? Dingus doesn’t even do his own maintenance.

    • yoink [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      1 year ago

      i tied the future of my kids to these houses, have you thought about that huh? every house you take from me you’re taking from the tiny toddler hands that i personally put them in, stop being so mean :(

      • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        (please ignore the future of those tenants’ kids and how they’ll be hundreds of thousands dollars poorer because I took it from them)

      • JohnBrownsBussy2 [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        55
        ·
        1 year ago

        To give a serious answer, landlords have a material class interest in conducting the unearned expropriation of rents from workers/tenants (and to be honest, literally everyone who isn’t a landlord). Even from a classical liberal perspective (i.e. Adam Smith) landlords have done nothing to merit these rents, they’ve simply partaken in the principal expropriation (that is, the expropriation of what once was and ought to be the provenance of all people, the land and nature more broadly). Landlords do not merit the revenues of their property, since any revenues they obtain are generated from the value of the property itself: all the landlord does is own it (i.e., “passive income”), and that ownership was/is established by a system of violence. In the modern day, landlords rely on the state system of violence to protect their property and force others to fork over rents to use it, which is a change over the original landlord system, where the landlord and their armed flunkies would have to do it themselves. So, an individual landlord can preach liberal platitudes, but when it comes to the fundamental economic relationships, their existence as a class is predicated on the preservation of a fundamental/primordial injustice and the deprivation of their fellow human beings.

        In summary: mao-shining

      • combat_brandonism [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Engels was a dirty blue blood who owned a factory but I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that ConfusedAZ’s idea of ‘left-leaning’ is more right wing than Boris Johnson.

      • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can but it’s exceedingly unlikely because your own material interest is tied to these things:

        • Ever-increasing land values (largely financial speculation and the creation of housing-limiting regimes).

        • Private ownership of housing as a profit-generating asset (commodity) rather than a human right.

        • State violence in the form of the police, who function to protect private property interests.

        • The direct extraction of working people’s money simply because you have more than they do. You could afford the down payment, they could not. Now they pay for your mortgage and more simply because they are poorer.

        • Landlords are traditionally shitty people that think of others, particularly their renters, as trying to pull one over on them.

        • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can but it’s exceedingly unlikely because your own material interest is tied to these things:

          People are more complicated then that, you really think this is an accurate point of view?

          • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            31
            ·
            1 year ago

            You ever seen someone get evicted, or get evicted yourself?

            That’s a landlord showing you how much humanity corroded by those material intersests.

            It kills people.

            • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Two issues I have with what you’re saying, this is a generalization being used to judge an individual, and materialism isn’t incompatible with being left leaning. Do you not have possessions or income?

              • boboblaw [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                26
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Around these parts, when you see the word “materialism”, it’s being used in the philosophical sense, rather than the common usage.

                Materialism is a set of related theories which hold that all entities and processes are composed of – or are reducible to – matter, material forces or physical processes. All events and facts are explainable, actually or in principle, in terms of body, material objects or dynamic material changes or movements. In general, the metaphysical theory of materialism entails the denial of the reality of spiritual beings, consciousness and mental or psychic states or processes, as ontologically distinct from, or independent of, material changes or processes.

                Taken from the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/materialism/v-1

              • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                21
                ·
                1 year ago

                There are other meanings for the word material, ha. Material interest means they get stuff that benefits them if they act a certain way. It is in your material interest to own a house so that you can have housing security. It is in a landlord’s interest that you rent from them instead, and for as much as you’ll pay.

                And there’s nothing wrong with judging individuals based on what they choose to do with their lives. There are activities and professions (not that landlording is a profession) that are inherently extractive and detrimental and that nobody is forced to do. For example, working as a mercenary.

                • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  There are other meanings for the word material, ha. Material interest means they get stuff that benefits them if they act a certain way. It is in your material interest to own a house so that you can have housing security. It is in a landlord’s interest that you rent from them instead, and for as much as you’ll pay.

                  Okay, don’t answer my question.

                  And there’s nothing wrong with judging individuals based on what they choose to do with their lives.

                  Factually it’s wrong. You’re judging them by the associations of what they choose to do with their lives, not the actuality.

                  Thank you for the insight.

                  • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    13
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Okay, don’t answer my question.

                    Your question was based on a misunderstanding of what I meant by materialism and therefore irrelevent. I would also assumes it was rhetorical.

                    Did you, at any point, consider engaging with what I said and addressing it? You’re going in a bad faith direction.

                    Factually it’s wrong.

                    What facts are incorrect?

                    You’re judging them by the associations of what they choose to do with their lives, not the actuality.

                    It’s not an association it’s owning housing and renting it to other people to make a profit. That’s an economic and social activity. This is obvious, but you seem to be struggling with being wrong.

        • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s subjective, but this quote seems to align with my perspective:

          Generally, the left wing is characterized by an emphasis on “ideas such as freedom, equality, fraternity, rights, progress, reform and internationalism” while the right wing is characterized by an emphasis on “notions such as authority, hierarchy, order, duty, tradition, reaction and nationalism”

            • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay, so I see what you’re saying, but from my perspective this would be like saying someone openly gay can’t be right leaning.

              • yoink [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                35
                ·
                1 year ago

                that would have to also necessarily imply that being gay is a choice, similarly to landlording, and that you have no choice but to be a landlord regardless of your political beliefs

              • machinya [it/its, fae/faer]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                28
                ·
                1 year ago

                being gay doesn’t say anything about personal beliefs or political alignment. it’s just one personal feature that might or might not influence your political thinking. people in privileged possitions tend to lean right because they tend to benefit from the current system regardless if they are part of a generally opressed minority

                  • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    17
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    not really - you can be gay and own a major corporation, which necessarily moves you rightward. these personal identity markers are subsumed by material interests and therefore class. it’s, for example, why so many white, wealthy gay people are significantly to the right of where they were 40 years ago - cf Peter Thiel. when the state was turned against their existence they were nominally left and as that violence abated, class interests dominated. it’s also why so many trans people are communists right now - the state is trying to murder us.

          • CrispyFern [fae/faer, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            1 year ago

            The left/right distinction is to determine if something is pro or anti capitalism. If you like capitalism or think it can be “reformed” then you are right wing. If you want to see capitalism destroyed, then you are left wing.

            The 2 main classes of people under capitalism are the proletariat (working class, 99%, people who make a living by performing labor and receiving a wage), and the capitalists (bourgeois, ownership class, 1%, people who make a living by owning shit). Landlords are firmly in the capitalist class, which means their entire livelihood is based around capitalism continuing to exist in it’s current form. It’s nearly impossible for a landlord to be left wing because it goes against their own self interest. I guess class traitors exist, but I doubt the person in question is one since they’re trying so hard to downplay being a landlord.

            TL;DR: porky-scared-flipped stalin-gun-1 mao-shining

            • CorruptBuddha@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The left/right distinction is to determine if something is pro or anti capitalism. If you like capitalism or think it can be “reformed” then you are right wing. If you want to see capitalism destroyed, then you are left wing.

              I don’t agree.

              From what I see there’s a strong effort to redefine terms like left and right to shame people into adjusting their values.

                  • combat_brandonism [they/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    15
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Hey liberal, I see you’re running afoul of our “Post”-based posting rules here. If you’d like I can explain them so fewer of your comments are removed.

                    Also, just because liberal hegemony brutally suppressed the left in the west for the last ~150 years (including the present day) doesn’t mean that liberalism magically became left wing as a result. Liberalism hasn’t been left-wing since the mid-19th century. So now it’s our turn to ask you, sorry what year is it again?