this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
441 points (94.0% liked)
Memes
45560 readers
1700 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel like I do this alot, except it's the Aztec Empire instead of capitalism.
FWIW I'm one of those people who would rather hear about Aztecs than today's weather, so thank you.
I do too, except it's billionaires instead of capitalism.
I believe in capitalism, it just needs to be very tightly controlled and heavily skewed in favor of the disadvantaged to keep it fair.
Capitalism always exploits someone whether the bulk of the exploitation is within your country’s borders or not. Being perfectly comfortable within capitalism comes at the expense of someone else regardless of regulation.
One, I don't believe it has to be that way. With enough taxes on the wealthy, regulation on commerce, and social programs for the poor, I think a system of fairness can be achieved.
Two, I don't believe that communism of any form result in a sense of fairness for anyone. I believe most humans have an innate desire to work to improve their lives, and I don't believe communism offers the same freedom and opportunities for self improvement through honest work that can be offered by tightly regulated capitalism in combination with strong social programs.
The fact that the poor still exist in your ideal "fair" society indicates that a capitalist system still relies on exploitation. How do you make "work or starve" disappear while still being capitalist?
Communism is a stateless, moneyless society. It's a utopian marker for people in the present day. It's not a fixed ideology in and of itself. The Spanish Anarchists of the CNT-FAI and the USSR have very little in common but both aspired to implement communism, at least on paper. I have my criticisms but they're not relevant.
You would be correct in saying that people have an innate desire to labor and improve their lives. Capitalism forces you to (attempt to) improve your life and shape the world through competition with your peers. If you're disadvantaged in some way, fuck you. Work harder or die in the streets. Social programs and welfare are antithetical to capitalism. It doesn't independently generate profit and thus is often ignored or slowly eroded over time when it does manage to manifest. Socialism/ socialist ideologies (worker ownership of the means of production) enables people to improve their life and shape the world through cooperation. It seeks to ensure everyone is able to live a dignified life and contribute according to their ability. Humans are capable of both competiton and cooperation and capitalism builds a very one sided society that demands competition. It's a terrible way to live and alienates people from each other.
Socialism (in my perspective as an anarchist) seeks to allow people to live their lives with the maximal amount of freedom, self determination, and autonomy possible. Whether that includes markets (which I'm assuming is what you mean by capitalism, since that's what most people who defend capitalism think it is), planned economies, gift economies, library economies or something completely different, is a better system than capitalism on a foundational level
Ancom here and I fully agree with everything you said. Hopefully we’ll get to where we’re going one day, whatever methodology ends up working.
You're calling me, an anarchist, a tankie? Do you even know what that word means? I know you read the part of my comment where I said I was an anarchist because you quoted it.
The combination of capitalism and socialism is called democratic socialism. It doesn't work long term. The Nordic model is essentially democratic socialism put to practice and it's gone well for the people in Nordic countries. They still suffer from capital strikes and other problems that are only going to get worse with time. These countries still rely on exploitation of people in the global south. Nestle is a swedish company with a terrible past. They have literally killed babies, use slave labor, and destroy ecosystems to extract wealth from poor countries. Spotify is another swedish company with a problematic track record. They're not alone either. H&M, IKEA and Nokia have all had sketchy track records. Why do Nordic companies have so many things wrong with them if they're companies founded in the "ideal" countries? Could it be because of inherent problems in capitalism? Nah! The system just needs tinkering, it'll all work out don't you worry!
I'll concede, the social problems in these countries are much smaller than, say, the US. They have managed to increase the quality of life of their polity. It's not perfect but it's better than what we have and it will continue to be that way for a little while longer until capital is able to erode those collective benefits further to increase their bottom line. Which they have done and will continue to do. See Canada and the UK for an idea of what the nordic countries will eventually devolve into and then have a look at the US for something closer to the end goal.
Capitalists are right.Capitalists have freedom, autonomy, and self determination. Problem is, most of us aren't capitalists and we don't have access to the material resources wealth gives you access to. And it has to be that way. There are very few that the above terms apply to and the overwhelming majority of us are excluded from the benefits of capitalism. "Work or starve" is the status quo for a reason.
All of this isn't even getting into the whole "infinite growth is impossible and it's killing the planet" thing. Capitalism will literally be the death of us and no amount of reforms are going to stop it. Capitalism is predicated on the assumption that infinite growth is possible and necessary. There are so many destructive and inhumane aspects to the ideology that at some point, it will become obvious that it can't be fixed. For a long time feudalism seemed like a perfectly good system that should be upheld. Sure there were problems, but it just needed to be tweaked. Do you know how that ended? Revolution.
Do you have anything substantive to say about the benefits of capitalism and democratic socialism or are you determined to have your head so far up your ass that polite criticism of the status quo makes you feel personally attacked? I didn't miss anything about your comment and if you knew a bit more about the things you're talking about you would see that. Instead of being a reactive anus for no good reason, why don't you try to understand what I'm saying? It's clear that you don't. I'd be happy to leave some resources for you to read up a little if you're interested in understanding what you're defending and what you're claiming to be against. Books, videos, articles, podcasts, just name your preferred method of media consumption and I'll leave something for you
Woah you escalated that quickly. Breathe. You guys were having a reasonable discussion that was enjoyable for me to read until you pulled out the insults and curses for some reason.
Why did you shift tone so suddenly? Their argument was reasonable.
You cannot have private ownership of the means of production and also worker control of the means of production.
When you say capitalism with lots of socialism that is what we hear, and it is nonsensical.
Historically communism allows for more improvement though. Working class people would be able to take college classes in the evenings for free. Peasant girls went from a future of marriage and housework to being able to be scientists.
It is more easy to motivate yourself to be better at your work when what you're doing benefits everyone than to motivate yourself to be better at your work when what you're doing just benefits some bourgeois fuck.
then it's no longer capitalism.
What would it be to have a market economy with private investments and also a system that ensures the tax system ensures everyone has at least basic housing and access to vocational schools and higher education? I don’t want to completely upend the system but tweak it so Kevin Griffin cries himself to sleep at night
Idealist. It would be easier and more viable to just have the means of production be owned and democratically managed by the proletariat than to share power in the long term with our exploiter without one side or the other losing.
Capitalism cannot be regulated to become fair. Capitalism is irrational and immoral, it does not need to be controlled or reformed, it must be overcome
If you think billionaires are bad but capitalism is good you don't know what capitalism is. You should seriously consider reading some of marx's shorter works like Value Price and Profit and Wage Labor and Capital.