0
1

Supporters of Capitalism: Do you think that capitalism is forever? (self.CapitalismVSocialism)

ruscommmieMarxist が 投稿

You know, slavery created more wealth than ever before in history. Same about feudalism and capitalism.

But slavery and feudalism played they part and gone. Why will capitalism stay forever?

全 34 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]JobDestroyerStatists gonna state. 4ポイント5ポイント  (15子コメント)

Again we see an example of people confusing legal systems with economics.

Capitalism is a state of nature, it pre-dates those other things. There has always been traders hocking wares.

So to answer your question, yup. There's no sign that it will die any time soon. It gets sick occasionally, but it doesn't die.

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. 1ポイント2ポイント  (13子コメント)

capitalism is not natural. neither is communism or anything else.

[–]JobDestroyerStatists gonna state. 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Nature is pretty natural.

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

how is capitalism natural? competition to the death only exists between two species- humans, which are the ones who invented capitalism, are all the exact same species. sure, some animals compete amongst themselves for mates. but capitalism doesn't. it butchers other members of the same species for imaginary benefit.

[–]JobDestroyerStatists gonna state. -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

You said nothing is natural. Nature is natural. You were wrong.

[–]R_Hak [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The market and compatition are intrinsic values of what we call capitalism. These values/caracteristics are also adopted by evolution and natural selection in order to "choose" the best individuals for a given (variable, unpredictable) environment - these genes will later be passed to the descendants and will spread into future populations the same way inovation and technology spreads and is adopted by other bussineses. The difference is that humans are civilised beings and have discovered that trading/exchangin with each other (and not fighting) is a better way to use and enhance the advantages we get from these intrinsic caracteristics found in the natural world.

[–]thamagUndecided -1ポイント0ポイント  (8子コメント)

Everything humans do is natural

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

no, it isn't.

[–]thamagUndecided [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

What is natural?

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

only our bodily functions and basest nature are natural.

[–]thamagUndecided [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

"basest"?

What is our basic nature then?

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

use of tools, social interaction, use of language, aversion to incest, among others. ideological thoughts like capitalism and socialism rise from the material conditions we're placed in.

[–]thamagUndecided [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

So is a bird using tools unnatural? An ape? Is it unnatural when dogs bark at each other? Or if there is hierarchy among animals?

There's no such thing as "unnatural"

[–]ruscommmieMarxist[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

So, what about millions of roman slaves, that died because of capitalism?

[–]OlejzMakuobligatory vague and needlessly specific ideology 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Of course not, it can be destroyed as it happened in Communist Russia or Maoist China or with a general collapse of civilization as we know it.

[–]ruscommmieMarxist[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

That is tautology, because capitalism is civilization as you know it.

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

fuckin two birds one stone

[–]bpg609 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Slavery did not create wealth. It actually destroyed wealth. Slavery was a tool for redistribution from the weak to the strong. Ditto for fuedalism.

Capitalism will stay (unless destroyed by force, as it did in USSR and Maoist China) because it is the most efficient arrangement that maximizes surplus value, which all systems before it did not. When something is efficient, it is very difficult to destroy because it creates so much surplus for all parties that most people are made worse off by abandoning it. For example, if workers tried to kill all the capitalists and redistribute their wealth, they would just be impoverished a generation later, so they're better off sticking with capitalism.

[–]urdaughtersacutiewikipedia.org/wiki/banal_rights [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Slavery did not create wealth. It actually destroyed wealth.

Glad to hear you've moved to the red team.

[–]LowReadydoesnt hire socialists 1ポイント2ポイント  (10子コメント)

Only until Robot Marx is finally upon us.

Also slavery didnt create wealth for those who it enslaved, unlike capitalism ;)

[–]ruscommmieMarxist[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

Slavery created life for them, because before that defeated tribe was cannibalised.

[–]LowReadydoesnt hire socialists 1ポイント2ポイント  (8子コメント)

Right but they were still prohibited from opportunity on the plantations. Capitalism does not prohibit opportunity where there is none, it is merely a process to allocate scarcity with increasing efficiency.

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. 2ポイント3ポイント  (7子コメント)

it does prohibit opportunity. i want to follow my career as an artist, but it doesn't pay well enough for me to afford the life-saving medications i take every day. there IS no opportunity in capitalism- only the necessity to sell yourself to wage labor so you don't die.

[–]LowReadydoesnt hire socialists 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

I know several professional artists who get by fine. Maybe you just arent very good in which case why would communists support you either?

Otherwise, "heres an extreme example" doesnt demonstrate "no opportunity" as you seem to think your emotion exercise concludes.

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

i'm a fine artist and i also write and develop games. but together my medications cost several thousand dollars alone, on TOP of food, housing, clothes, materials- i literally can't get that money on commissions alone.

Otherwise, "heres an extreme example" doesnt demonstrate "no opportunity" as you seem to think your emotion exercise concludes.

it literally does. do sweatshop workers have opportunity? do child slaves mining congolese silicon have it? nestle's enslaved cocoa workers? the homeless and disabled?

[–]LowReadydoesnt hire socialists 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

i'm a fine artist and i also write and develop games. but together my medications cost several thousand dollars alone, on TOP of food, housing, clothes, materials- i literally can't get that money on commissions alone.

Oh. Which socialist society would have been able to produce and give you so much food and medicine while you contribute so little labor? As in, show me proof that socialism has solved this problem.

it literally does...

I dont know if youve ever taken a science or logic course but no, none of your examples can conclude "no opportunity". Child workers when banned from labor have resorted to trading sex so even a sweat shop brought them shitty opportunity where there was only starvation and rape before. Otherwise your medical problems requiring too many resources only concludes that capitalism will noylt give you everything you want independent of your resource demands - a problem communism most definitely doesnt solve.

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

Oh. Which socialist society would have been able to produce and give you so much food and medicine while you contribute so little labor? As in, show me proof that socialism has solved this problem.

none of them. that's why you view the socialist experiments of the 20th century with a critical lens- to learn their successes and failures.

[–]LowReadydoesnt hire socialists 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

So youre against capitalism because it hasnt given you everything you want but you support a system which has literally never even done anything close....

[–]tammy-hellSilly bitch, I won't fall for your ruse. -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

that's why i advocate it. because it's possible. capitalism will never accomodate human needs. socialism will.

also, tell that to the ancap idiots on this sub who assert capitalism has never happened.

[–]Elder_YautjaVoluntaryist [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

"You know, slavery created more wealth than ever before in history."

Right away that is just factually wrong. Slavery was fundamentally uneconomical it was heavily subsidised by the state. It cost more to enforce than it ever produced. Same with feudalism its really just slavery-lite.

Asking me if capitalism is like asking me if science is forever. If there is a better method of determining the truth about our universe, not only have we not found a better method than science, you would actually have to use science in order to prove your new method was indeed superior.

Its the same with capitalism we have never discovered any other system that actually leads to economic prosperity. If a better system is possible, we haven't discovered it, and if one is, then we'll probably have to use capitalism to get there.

[–]R_Hak [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Premise: Capitalism requires freedom/ political freedom.

Yes it will be forever, but the relevance of human capital/mind could be greater with technolgy advancing and the exploration of the space as a new objective for humanity