1264
How's that supposed to work?
(lemmy.world)
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 12 Mar 2024
1264 points (97.7% liked)
Facepalm
3331 readers
72 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's not needed.
It's just needed to provide fantastic profits to the owners.
You can definitely have capitalism that pays a living wage, it just cuts into billionaires' profits.
Agreed, but keep in mind that within a capitalist system, the owners will always be fighting to take the working classes money with their profits.
The working class must always be vigilant and read to fight for their wages. There is no rest in a capitalist system.
Absolutely. 1000%.
Hierarchies are a necessary component to keep the Capitalist murder-cult running. You cannot maintain global domination without class-based social hierarchies.
Ftfy. Abolishing class is a utopian pipe dream. A good society allows for class mobility and tilts the social scales to make life more tolerable for the lower classes.
Are you misunderstanding what the word "class" means?
Nope.
Given your other response, the answer is actually yes.
Uh huh
Yep, and I explained it.
Even with a living wage, workers are still the underclass, and owners the overclass. As long as class dynamics exist, and class interests conflict, the class with more power will dominate the system overall in their favor.
That's why government should be the most powerful class, which keeps the ownership class in check via strong regulation.
Government isn't a class, really, unless it owns the Means of Production in some fashion. Government takes on the characteristics of whatever class is in power, as long as there is Capitalism Government will serve the bourgeoisie.
Thanks, Captain Pedantry. What would we do without you.
It's not pedantry, you have Utopian thinking. You believe the less powerful can wield the state to suppress those with more power, simply because it's "just" for that to happen. That kind of moralistic utopinaism, ie belief that because things are "right" that they will be, without actually seeking to understand mechanics, is counterintuitive.
It's not utopianism, it's be central premise of democracy, and has been successfully done numerous times. This isn't some radical new idea. It's how our existing government is supposed to function.
That's not the central premise of democracy. The central premise of democracy is majority rule, that's not what presently exists in the US. The US is not a direct democracy, it's a representative republic specifically designed to not upset the power dynamic of Capitalists over Workers.
Were you under the impression that the Capitalists that formed the structure of the US did so along the lines of the Workers, so that the Working Class may have power? I'm sorry to tell you, but that has never happened, and any gains the Working Class has made (such as under FDR) have been absolutely torn away over time, thanks the Class dynamics influencing government that you ignore.
I'm sorry, but I'm not a Utopian like yourself, I focus on reality and existing conditions.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firehose_of_falsehood
You truly are allergic to addressing arguments, aren't you? It must be easy to pretend you're correct if you only dodge points and misuse established terms, like class.