5 ms·

-_- I just wanna point out the homeless rate in China is higher than the United States, and you still have to pay rent in China too. So it's not really a capit

by viro 6y ago

-_- I just wanna point out the homeless rate in China is higher than the United States, and you still have to pay rent in China too. So it's not really a capitalism problem its a being alive problem.

rorykoehler 6y ago
What does China have to do with this?
viro 6y ago
@rorykoehler It's the most well known non capitalist society.
- rorykoehler 6y ago
  China is a capitalist state in all but name.
  - cheaprentalyeti 6y ago
    I'm beginning to think the whole "capitalist"/"communist" dialectic is meant to make people think there's a "capitalist" economic system or a "communist" economic system, whereas when the communists get control they make a "state capitalist" or "party capitalist" system that looks much like "capitalism" except it has a severely authoritarian political system (which everyone is told is a symptom of "capitalism.") In other words, "communism" is an authoritarian/dictatorial political system that masquerades as an economic system until it doesn't have to put up with any dissent, at which point it goes back to "capitalism." (State or Party or whatever. I think they call their version "with chinese characteristics" in the west.)
    - rorykoehler 6y ago
      If you read Das Kapital the only logical conclusion to draw is that this will eventually happen. Marx said something along the lines of capitalism will eat everything including itself. Communism cannot survive in a world where capitalism is active.
    - simonh 6y ago
      The root problem is that redistributive systems are inherently coercive. If your system has money and commerce of any kind, more money will end up in some hands than others. I'm not making a fundamental judgement on this, all laws are coercive in some sense, capitalist systems often have redistributive features, taxes and such. However redistribution in the extreme and complete sense in communism is often characterised in utopian terms. From each according to their ability, to each according to their need. That's a fine sentiment, but it entails an awful lot of systematic and thorough coercion, and the virtual elimination of freedom in the distribution and use of capital, or in fact property or resources of any kind. This is why we keep getting the "no true scotsman" complaint that criticisms of communism are invalid because they are never 'real' communism. That doesn't account for the coercive and prescriptive nature of a thoroughgoing redistributive system run by a bureaucratic elite. Since they need the authority to redistribute all resources, they need effectively unlimited power. That's why they keep ending up becoming so corrupt. To the extent that socialist systems retain any freedom in the use, exchange and accumulation of money, they become correspondingly capitalist. Hence communism with 'Chinese' (read capitalist) characteristics.
      - jokethrowaway 6y ago
        While I agree with the sentiment of your post, you seem to be conflating capitalism with what countries you believe to be capitalist implement. Most countries I can think of implement a mix of capitalism and socialism. Some features are capitalism, some are features of socialism. Coercion and taxation are not capitalism, taxation is just theft operated by the state. I consider the "no true scotsman" argument for communism to be valid: we never arrived to real communism and that's because it's impossible. Communism can be achieved only if all the individuals of society are perfect; without that perfection the best you can achieve is a socialist dictatorship. On the opposite (anarcho-capitalist) side, I think we should try to get rid of all our society socialist features and see if the free market can support us entirely. In my opinion, capitalism is not bad, we just don't have enough.
        simonh 6y ago
        I mostly agree with you, every country employs some mix of different economic systems. I agree communism is impossible, that's why I think no true scotsman is an invalid criticism. My post was largely an attempt to explain why I think it's impossible and also actually undesirable. That's all just semantics though, I think we agree on the actual issue. I disagree with your last paragraph. I oppose socialism as an ideology, as it is pursued by dyed in the wool socialists, but don't necessarily oppose all policies implemented in the name of socialism. I oppose ideologies generally, politically I support policies that have turned out to work, whatever the reasons might be. For example I do believe in the power of free markets and that capitalism is essentially based on individual liberty. However for example here in the UK we have a very effective and beloved national health service. It's not perfect and might not be the system I would choose from scratch, with unlimited power to make it as I wished, but it works and I would oppose any attempts to radically reform it. There's just too much that's good about it that we could break. Maggie, one of my political heroes, tried to reform it along market lines in the 80s and it was disastrous. But then there are historical reasons why Britain has some of it's economic and political settlements. Social consensus is important and what works for us might not work for others with different traditions, institutions and expectations.
- jokethrowaway 6y ago
  People are downvoting you because it looks like you think China is a communist society and western countries are capitalist societies. There is not much difference between China and western countries. Sure, China is a bit more oppressive (understatement of the year), but they both have element of capitalism and a huge set of coercitive and authoritarian laws which err on socialism.

by viro 6y ago

-_- I just wanna point out the homeless rate in China is higher than the United States, and you still have to pay rent in China too. So it's not really a capitalism problem its a being alive problem.

rorykoehler 6y ago

What does China have to do with this?

viro 6y ago

@rorykoehler It's the most well known non capitalist society.

rorykoehler 6y ago
China is a capitalist state in all but name.
- cheaprentalyeti 6y ago
  I'm beginning to think the whole "capitalist"/"communist" dialectic is meant to make people think there's a "capitalist" economic system or a "communist" economic system, whereas when the communists get control they make a "state capitalist" or "party capitalist" system that looks much like "capitalism" except it has a severely authoritarian political system (which everyone is told is a symptom of "capitalism.") In other words, "communism" is an authoritarian/dictatorial political system that masquerades as an economic system until it doesn't have to put up with any dissent, at which point it goes back to "capitalism." (State or Party or whatever. I think they call their version "with chinese characteristics" in the west.)
  - rorykoehler 6y ago
    If you read Das Kapital the only logical conclusion to draw is that this will eventually happen. Marx said something along the lines of capitalism will eat everything including itself. Communism cannot survive in a world where capitalism is active.
  - simonh 6y ago
    The root problem is that redistributive systems are inherently coercive. If your system has money and commerce of any kind, more money will end up in some hands than others. I'm not making a fundamental judgement on this, all laws are coercive in some sense, capitalist systems often have redistributive features, taxes and such. However redistribution in the extreme and complete sense in communism is often characterised in utopian terms. From each according to their ability, to each according to their need. That's a fine sentiment, but it entails an awful lot of systematic and thorough coercion, and the virtual elimination of freedom in the distribution and use of capital, or in fact property or resources of any kind. This is why we keep getting the "no true scotsman" complaint that criticisms of communism are invalid because they are never 'real' communism. That doesn't account for the coercive and prescriptive nature of a thoroughgoing redistributive system run by a bureaucratic elite. Since they need the authority to redistribute all resources, they need effectively unlimited power. That's why they keep ending up becoming so corrupt. To the extent that socialist systems retain any freedom in the use, exchange and accumulation of money, they become correspondingly capitalist. Hence communism with 'Chinese' (read capitalist) characteristics.
    - jokethrowaway 6y ago
      While I agree with the sentiment of your post, you seem to be conflating capitalism with what countries you believe to be capitalist implement. Most countries I can think of implement a mix of capitalism and socialism. Some features are capitalism, some are features of socialism. Coercion and taxation are not capitalism, taxation is just theft operated by the state. I consider the "no true scotsman" argument for communism to be valid: we never arrived to real communism and that's because it's impossible. Communism can be achieved only if all the individuals of society are perfect; without that perfection the best you can achieve is a socialist dictatorship. On the opposite (anarcho-capitalist) side, I think we should try to get rid of all our society socialist features and see if the free market can support us entirely. In my opinion, capitalism is not bad, we just don't have enough.
      - simonh 6y ago
        I mostly agree with you, every country employs some mix of different economic systems. I agree communism is impossible, that's why I think no true scotsman is an invalid criticism. My post was largely an attempt to explain why I think it's impossible and also actually undesirable. That's all just semantics though, I think we agree on the actual issue. I disagree with your last paragraph. I oppose socialism as an ideology, as it is pursued by dyed in the wool socialists, but don't necessarily oppose all policies implemented in the name of socialism. I oppose ideologies generally, politically I support policies that have turned out to work, whatever the reasons might be. For example I do believe in the power of free markets and that capitalism is essentially based on individual liberty. However for example here in the UK we have a very effective and beloved national health service. It's not perfect and might not be the system I would choose from scratch, with unlimited power to make it as I wished, but it works and I would oppose any attempts to radically reform it. There's just too much that's good about it that we could break. Maggie, one of my political heroes, tried to reform it along market lines in the 80s and it was disastrous. But then there are historical reasons why Britain has some of it's economic and political settlements. Social consensus is important and what works for us might not work for others with different traditions, institutions and expectations.
jokethrowaway 6y ago
People are downvoting you because it looks like you think China is a communist society and western countries are capitalist societies. There is not much difference between China and western countries. Sure, China is a bit more oppressive (understatement of the year), but they both have element of capitalism and a huge set of coercitive and authoritarian laws which err on socialism.