448
Why are folks so anti-capitalist?
(programming.dev)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
448 points (75.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43762 readers
1152 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I am pro-capitalist myself because there is literally no evidence for anything else working well on earth. Capitalist systems (albeit with regulations to maintain free markets - ie snuff monopolies and anticompetitive practices) have improved the standard of living for people more than any other system ever has. But I full expect flurries of downvotes because of where I am and the group think circle jerk here.
Do you believe it's the only thing that's worked so far, or the only thing that could ever possibly work?
Any rational capitalist (or more realistically, mixed market supporter) should agree that other systems are theoretically possible, and should probably even support small scale scientific tests of whatever people want to realistically propose.
This already happens with tests of UBI occurring all over and examples of coops existing in many places as well. UBI is too new to say but looks promising, and coops seem great in certain areas of the economy if properly supported but not optimal everywhere, as far as I'm aware.
However, if someone thinks their system can only work with absolutely everyone in society participating after a revolution where the sinners (whoever they are) are eliminated, they really ought to recalibrate their beliefs or join a militia if they're really serious.
Can you point to a socialist country where it has resulted in better outcomes than its peers? Cuba might be a contender but then there's also Venezuela next door...
I do not consider China to be a socialist country. It is a market economy where your average Foxconn employee no more controls the means of production than your average Detroit autoworker. My understanding is that China doctrine states socialism is one big long term TODO (with ever moving goalposts), requiring their economy and material wealth to have grown first. Well, you can't deny it's grown but I'm still hearing a lot about Chinese billionaires while there's also a huge swath of Chinese rural poor.
I can agree with the "so far" qualifier. Things can always be improved, and yes many other systems look great on paper. I am just waiting for the evidence of those other systems functioning in practice. Personally, I would not my country to be the guinea pig in case it backfires. I am content with my western country and its generally current standard of living over past generations and civilizations.
You do realize most of the other attempts at something else have been largely destroyed or stifled by the United States on behalf of capitalist interests right? Map for context
Sure, there's no argument about the benefits for many (me and you included, as demonstrated by the fact we can have the resources and time to post this here) of that system. And it's true that it works better than many other systems we've tried. Absolutely! That does not change the fact that it is by its nature combined with human nature, demonstrably inevitably self-destructive for all. Ignoring that (which, of course, so many folks are very motivated to do) is at our peril. We literally won't have to worry about what system is better or worse for much longer if this continues.
So, it seems quite clear that arguing that it's better than the others, for many, for now, is not a useful, rational, or coherent approach, since it is inevitably fatal for all. That is a bit like arguing that it's 'better' to wear small amounts of lead (and other poisonous substances) in cosmetics to attract folks we want to have around us socially (as the elite did, of course, in our history) resulting in the inevitable mid and long term sickness and death of those people instead of finding other solutions.
Instead, it seems far more rational to work really hard to figure out what can work better!
I think if, culturally, we have a value shift (it's already happening imo) then we can properly commodify important aspects nature. e.g., how much value is there in reducing in our CO2 output? How much value is there in preserving these species? Right now, we don't place enough value on it, and that's why I think regulations are incredibly important in a capitalist system. We certainly need more of it, but we also need it globally so companies can't just jump ship to other places where those values aren't in place.