(cache) gamercerがBehold the Power of Capitalism!について記入したコメント

325

326

327

Behold the Power of Capitalism! (imgur.com)

WineRedPsyFrihetlig Socialist (Member of Ung Vänster) が 1 日前投稿

あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]gamercer -40 ポイント-39 ポイント-38 ポイント 1 日前 (34子コメント)

固定リンク

[–]CyridiusSocialist Party of Ireland | CWI 31 ポイント32 ポイント33 ポイント 1 日前 (32子コメント)

[+]gamercer スコアが基準値未満のコメント-27 ポイント-26 ポイント-25 ポイント 1 日前 (31子コメント)

The author of that article confuses government monopolies of production, money supply, violence, and material production with capitalism. That's socialism.

Trading for land, isn't imperialism. Using violence to acquire land is.

definition of imperialism that will include the following five of its basic features:

(1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life;

Except government's enforce monopolies using violence, ie. socialists, not capitalists.

(2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “finance capital”, of a financial oligarchy;

Any government with a printing press does this. Government control of money supply means a socialized financial system, and necessarily, an oligarchy.

(3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance;

This is so vague I have no response to it.

(4) the formation of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world among themselves

Every monopoly in the USA is that way through violent enforcement of laws. For socialism to work, competition to the state can't be allowed, and it would make this point even worse.

(5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed. Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.

Isn't this what you want as a socialist? Everyone to be part of the system? What if a large city opts out of your particular brand of socialism?

It's like you guys see the huge problems with government, but think the solution is a more powerful, more violent government.

[–]CyridiusSocialist Party of Ireland | CWI 18 ポイント19 ポイント20 ポイント 1 日前 (12子コメント)

[+]gamercer スコアが基準値未満のコメント-24 ポイント-23 ポイント-22 ポイント 1 日前 (11子コメント)

[–]PatBerellMikhail Bakunin 23 ポイント24 ポイント25 ポイント 1 日前 (0子コメント)

[–]Sergeant_Static 9 ポイント10 ポイント11 ポイント 1 日前 (9子コメント)

[+]gamercer スコアが基準値未満のコメント-19 ポイント-18 ポイント-17 ポイント 1 日前 (8子コメント)

[–]CyridiusSocialist Party of Ireland | CWI 10 ポイント11 ポイント12 ポイント 1 日前 (4子コメント)

[–]rocktheprovinceMarxist 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 23 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]GohteTrotskyist 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 19 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]c0mbobreaker 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 17 時間前 (1子コメント)

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]tanacobus 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 11 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Sergeant_Static 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 日前 (1子コメント)

A large state would exist in a crony capitalist economy, not free-market; my mistake. That being said, both serve the rich and alienate the poor.

In a large state capitalist economy, decisions are made by the government, whose campaigns are funded by corporations (with no limits on their donations) meaning government officials are acting on the interests of corporations. In the words of Martin Luther King Jr. "We have Socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor."

In a free-market capitalist economy, corporations have no bounds on the means by which they make money. Exploiting workers, playing them low wages, unsafe work environments, pollution, and the list of shitty things goes on. In this economy, the government does nothing to stop corporations from abusing workers.

What we need is a true democracy with a state large enough to regulate the business sector, but whose representatives are there to represent the will of all people, not just those with money. Democratic Socialism fits these quite well.

To be fair, a Social Democracy (similar to what the United States is trying) would also do this, but the problem still exists of those who have money dominating the government.

[–]shroom_throwaway9722☭ Marxism-Leninism-Maoism ☭ 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 20 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]DeLaProle 11 ポイント12 ポイント13 ポイント 1 日前 (12子コメント)

[–]cae388BSDLP (M) -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 20 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]TiakMarxism-Skynetism 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 20 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]gamercer -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 16 時間前 (8子コメント)

[–]dominosci 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 6 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]gamercer 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 5 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]dominosci 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 5 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]DeLaProle 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 15 時間前* (4子コメント)

You don't need government violence to enforce socialism, you need it to enforce capitalism.

In capitalism there is private, often absentee, ownership and control over property. For example a capitalist in NY owning a factory in let's say Texas, employing 100 people. This capitalist probably has not ever been to this factory, he is therefore incapable of protecting his property. He needs the state, it's judicial system, and it's police to (a) protect this property and (b) to discipline the workers. If the workers think they aren't paid enough and go on strike, the police show up. If the workers feel as if the products they make are better needed in their community, the police show up. If the workers are laid off because the owner wants to "move it" overseas, and they do not leave the factory, the police show up. If the workers believe the factory owner is forcing them to work in miserable conditions and seek sabotage as their revenge, the police show up. If the workers decide the factory is polluting their community with waste and refuse to dump toxic materials into their neighborhood the police show up.

In a socialist society this farce is unnecessary. The 100 workers would collectively own the factory by virtue of occupation and use of it. They would not choose to pollute their own community, they would not choose to work in squalid conditions, they would not move their own factory overseas, and they would not sabotage their own work. The police are not needed. Even when it comes to cases of defending the property, 100 armed workers are more than capable of defending it, whereas in capitalism the one owner, even if he isn't an absentee owner, is incapable of doing so and thus relies on the state.

[–]oolalaa 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 8 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]oolalaa 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 8 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]DeLaProle 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 7 時間前 (1子コメント)

The ubiquitous assumption embedded in socialist thought is that the vast majority of the "working class" agree with you that capitalism is exploitative

No it doesn't... The concept of class-consciousness is a very important aspect of Marxism and the socialism deviated therefrom. We, as a society, look back now at feudal society and scoff at it, finding it impossible to even imagine reverting back to such a system, completely unequivocal about how much better our capitalist system is than the feudal one. The idea that we should debate about feudalism being a possible system is unthinkable.

But during feudal society there existed many who said the same exact thing about post-feudal society. The "it may not be perfect but it's the best system we have" types. This type of sentiment likewise exists in present society, as you prove. It does not disprove a post-capitalist system any more than the former disproves post-feudal society.

[–]oolalaa 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 6 時間前 (0子コメント)

No it doesn't...

Yet, you said..

In a socialist society this farce is unnecessary. The 100 workers would collectively own the factory by virtue of occupation and use of it. They would not choose to pollute their own community, they would not choose to work in squalid conditions, they would not move their own factory overseas, and they would not sabotage their own work.

The socialist assumption is that the "working class" are being exploited against their will, by the the capitalist State. That private property relations are being enforced against their will by the capitalist State. Correct?

What I'm getting at is the almost unbelievable naivety of most socialists..

1) Everyone agrees/conforms to the socialist rules.

2) If there are dissenters (and they act on their dissent) then the people tasked with bringing those "criminals" to justice are somehow not a de facto State.

Socialism in all its forms is majority rule. That majority rule needs to be enforced by certain people, people who are no doubt elected by the majority. These people form a group that then enacts violence to enforce the socialist rules and institutions. This group is ergo indistinguishable from a State.

[–]misanthropic-rage 18 ポイント19 ポイント20 ポイント 1 日前 (1子コメント)

[–]MagefallI'm whats destroying America 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 19 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]ParisPC07Fred Hampton 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 1 日前 (2子コメント)

[–]MagefallI'm whats destroying America 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 19 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]c0mbobreaker 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 17 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]SafetyJoe 10 ポイント11 ポイント12 ポイント 1 日前 (0子コメント)

ユーザインターフェイス用言語	(*) 未完成翻訳ボランティアに立候補する

π Rendered by PID 14199 on app-136 at 2015-01-04 01:28:11.666523+00:00 running ed7ac98 country code: JP.

socialism

Welcome to r/socialism!

Rules

Related Subreddits

調停者

socialism

Welcome to r/socialism!

Rules

Related Subreddits

調停者

you'll need to sign in or create an account to do that

新しいアカウントを作る

sign in