I like this analogy, because you can kill all those other ideologies and it’ll come back as capitalism and even when you kill capitalism, it doesn’t stay gone so you just make it work for you.
No, sorry, this is incorrect. There are much more efficient and fair modes of production out there. Case in point would be Cuba, or China. The leaps and bounds they’ve made in spite of the largest and most murderous economic power in the world trying to sabotage them every step of the way should be evidence enough of that.
The most efficient mode of production doesn’t really matter if you want your economy to thrive, helping the working class does, and China is now better at than than the US. That’s why they’re doing well, not because they’re less capitalist. Capitalism can help the working class more than hurt it just as easily as not.
Sorry but here again you’re just wrong on a factual level. China is not capitalist. Read whatever Cowbee writes, they’re usually good at explaining things.
No, Capitalism is just one Mode of Production, a relatively new one, in a long chain of them. It isn’t the first, and will not be the last unless we nuke ourselves to death or Climate Change kills us all.
We’re literally going to capitalize ourselves to death because of human nature.
Basically, humans trade, humans establish hierarchy, hierarchy establishes currency based on real things or favors to deal with the presence of other hierarchy and to compete, real things end up being used as it is more reliable and favor based economies get conquered, capitalism.
Edit: And if you think you can solve capitalism with a moral bullet, you’ll likely pacify us into losing to someone or something more violent than we are or create an violently enlightened society led by dark empaths and capitalism is still a thing because we’ll still be trading and be using money to exchange goods to build things whether the system is open or closed.
Such has been the present interpretation of the course of recorded history. Recorded most often by conquerors, looking favorably upon the the ends of their conquest to justify their means, and if you boil just about every single conquering ideology down for long enough, you will see two things, in this order: greed for what the conquered populace had, and fear of not having enough.
That’s not “human nature,” that’s a response to human nature. Most of us would probably generally prefer to go on living. For many people, that looks like “i just need my necessities covered and I’ll figure out the rest.” Historically this happened by banding together and looking out for one another, not by hoarding resources and making people do extra work just to fucking exist with a modicum of comfort in a society forever dangling a golden carrot to keep you distracted from the meat grinder.
Bigger text doesn’t make your point look better it makes it look obnoxious, but there is a lot of truth in that.
Our problem is we’ve grown so big because we’ve had more nature to conquer and now we’ve conquered the land, we only have each other left to conquer unless we figure out a way to conquer more nature.
More like, capitalism is the road. There’s a lot ways to build a road, and some roads are better than others, but you need the road. When there is no road, you create one. Whether the currency is money, favors, ideas, or bartering.
Human nature is malleable, it is determined by material conditions, ie the surroundings and experiences, including the economic formation of society. As society shifts in Mode of Prodiction, “Human Nature” shifts with it.
Further, Capitalism is not simply using currency to trade. It arose only a few hundred years ago. Currency existed back in feudal eras, despite predating Capitalism. Capitalism specifically arose primarily with technologies like the Steam Engine. More generally, Capitalism is more about turning a sum of money into a larger sum of money through paying wage laborers to create commodities using Capital you own, competing within a market where this is the principle aspect of the economy.
This system is relatively new, and is already being phased out in Socialist countries like the PRC.
Yes and no. We conquer and dominate and build. All human cities look roughly similar. Productivity wins because it conquers those who aren’t.
Even China uses their own form of capitalism. Chinese history is more capitalist than most countries too imo. China hasn’t risen above capitalism, they mastered their own style of it, but as waves rise and fall, the state of a country’s economy is ever changing. Today they are wolves, but without the century of humiliation they might not be, just as America would not have had anywhere to fall if did not climb so high.
You’re conflating production with Capitalism, and ignoring that the principle ownership of China’s economy is public, not private. I don’t think you’ve genuinely engaged with Socialism as a concept, you are over-generalizing Capitalism to periods and forms of production it doesn’t apply to.
The statement of the main comment seems to be that capitalism is equal to exploitation and hierarchy, communism(or another placeholder) then is equal to end of suffering, exploitation and hierarchy, that’s why he/she sees capitalism as inevitable and communism and other ideologies seems utopic in comparison.
I like this analogy, because you can kill all those other ideologies and it’ll come back as capitalism and even when you kill capitalism, it doesn’t stay gone so you just make it work for you.
There is no alternative ™
The best you can do is control it for a time.
No, sorry, this is incorrect. There are much more efficient and fair modes of production out there. Case in point would be Cuba, or China. The leaps and bounds they’ve made in spite of the largest and most murderous economic power in the world trying to sabotage them every step of the way should be evidence enough of that.
The most efficient mode of production doesn’t really matter if you want your economy to thrive, helping the working class does, and China is now better at than than the US. That’s why they’re doing well, not because they’re less capitalist. Capitalism can help the working class more than hurt it just as easily as not.
Sorry but here again you’re just wrong on a factual level. China is not capitalist. Read whatever Cowbee writes, they’re usually good at explaining things.
There are no capitalists in China, China itself is the capitalist.
Well said!
You’re a very entertaining poster
What on Earth are you talking about?
All roads lead to capitalism.
No, Capitalism is just one Mode of Production, a relatively new one, in a long chain of them. It isn’t the first, and will not be the last unless we nuke ourselves to death or Climate Change kills us all.
We’re literally going to capitalize ourselves to death because of human nature.
Basically, humans trade, humans establish hierarchy, hierarchy establishes currency based on real things or favors to deal with the presence of other hierarchy and to compete, real things end up being used as it is more reliable and favor based economies get conquered, capitalism.
Edit: And if you think you can solve capitalism with a moral bullet, you’ll likely pacify us into losing to someone or something more violent than we are or create an violently enlightened society led by dark empaths and capitalism is still a thing because we’ll still be trading and be using money to exchange goods to build things whether the system is open or closed.
Such has been the present interpretation of the course of recorded history. Recorded most often by conquerors, looking favorably upon the the ends of their conquest to justify their means, and if you boil just about every single conquering ideology down for long enough, you will see two things, in this order: greed for what the conquered populace had, and fear of not having enough.
That’s not “human nature,” that’s a response to human nature. Most of us would probably generally prefer to go on living. For many people, that looks like “i just need my necessities covered and I’ll figure out the rest.” Historically this happened by banding together and looking out for one another, not by hoarding resources and making people do extra work just to fucking exist with a modicum of comfort in a society forever dangling a golden carrot to keep you distracted from the meat grinder.
Bigger text doesn’t make your point look better it makes it look obnoxious, but there is a lot of truth in that.
Our problem is we’ve grown so big because we’ve had more nature to conquer and now we’ve conquered the land, we only have each other left to conquer unless we figure out a way to conquer more nature.
All roads lead to present thing
Person experiencing present thing
More like, capitalism is the road. There’s a lot ways to build a road, and some roads are better than others, but you need the road. When there is no road, you create one. Whether the currency is money, favors, ideas, or bartering.
Capitalism is not when money.
Capitalism is when you make companies the government.
That’s a type of capitalism.
Capitalism has only been around for a tiny portion of human history
Human nature is malleable, it is determined by material conditions, ie the surroundings and experiences, including the economic formation of society. As society shifts in Mode of Prodiction, “Human Nature” shifts with it.
Further, Capitalism is not simply using currency to trade. It arose only a few hundred years ago. Currency existed back in feudal eras, despite predating Capitalism. Capitalism specifically arose primarily with technologies like the Steam Engine. More generally, Capitalism is more about turning a sum of money into a larger sum of money through paying wage laborers to create commodities using Capital you own, competing within a market where this is the principle aspect of the economy.
This system is relatively new, and is already being phased out in Socialist countries like the PRC.
Yes and no. We conquer and dominate and build. All human cities look roughly similar. Productivity wins because it conquers those who aren’t.
Even China uses their own form of capitalism. Chinese history is more capitalist than most countries too imo. China hasn’t risen above capitalism, they mastered their own style of it, but as waves rise and fall, the state of a country’s economy is ever changing. Today they are wolves, but without the century of humiliation they might not be, just as America would not have had anywhere to fall if did not climb so high.
You’re conflating production with Capitalism, and ignoring that the principle ownership of China’s economy is public, not private. I don’t think you’ve genuinely engaged with Socialism as a concept, you are over-generalizing Capitalism to periods and forms of production it doesn’t apply to.
The statement of the main comment seems to be that capitalism is equal to exploitation and hierarchy, communism(or another placeholder) then is equal to end of suffering, exploitation and hierarchy, that’s why he/she sees capitalism as inevitable and communism and other ideologies seems utopic in comparison.
That’s actually a good point but I would argue when power is in the hands of the public as you say, the gov officials become the capitalists.