4 ms·
> And Tesla should be allowed every opportunity to stop them. We've tried this. People died over it. We enacted laws to prevent it from happening, so that lab
by boustrophedon 6y ago
> And Tesla should be allowed every opportunity to stop them.
We've tried this. People died over it. We enacted laws to prevent it from happening, so that labor can stand on equal ground with capital.
- kova12 6y agoLabor, Capital - jeez there's plenty of countries built on Marxist ideology you are advocating. Go live there. China, Venezuella, North Korea - check them out see if you like it. USA was not built on that ideology, can we please keep it that way thank you very much? I would much rather see a single place not destroyed by a mob of parasites
- colinmhayes 6y agoAll economies consist of labor and capital vying for resources.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> All economies consist of labor and capital vying for resources Economies without property rights in capital do not. They may have other (and even more significant) problems, but they don't have that one.
- mrkstu 6y agoAn example of such an economy IRL?
- dragonwriter 6y agoLots of small-community, low-tech societies (very much “pre-capitalist” in the view of either capitalist or Marxist teleogical economic descriptions).
- colinmhayes 6y agoLow tech societies still have capital. I was looking at givedirectly recipient stories, https://live.givedirectly.org/newsfeed/search?search=Kenya+Covid-19#search https://live.givedirectly.org/newsfeed/search?search=Kenya+C.... Almost everyone uses their money to invest in their home, livestock, or children's education. The push and pull between capital and labor absolutely exists here.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> Low tech societies still have capital. I was looking at givedirectly recipient stories, I was referring to historical low tech, small community societies, not any places integrated enough with the modern global economic to have “givedirectly recipient stories”. But, that aside: > Almost everyone uses their money to invest in their home, livestock, or children's education Neither a home nor children's education is capital. Livestock is, but plenty of historical societies didn't feature private ownership of livestock (though it's probably one of the oldest forms of private capital.)
- colinmhayes 6y agoThere aren't really any communities large enough to be considered societies and are so cut off from technology that they couldn't be the recipients of givedirectly. Homes and human capital are absolutely capital.
- darawk 6y agoNK essentially operates this way, at least nominally.
- rsj_hn 6y ago"Economies without property rights in capital" is a convoluted way of saying "economies without capital", and so of course those economies do not have to worry about any conflict between labor and capital, just as societies without higher education don't need to worry about SAT scores declining.
- eru 6y agoThere's also land.
- mhh__ 6y agoI don't believe in the practice of Marxism, however I do believe that Marxism broadly calls correctly the issues society has.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> Labor, Capital - jeez there's plenty of countries built on Marxist ideology you are advocating. No, there aren't. There are plenty of countries built on Leninist (and it's descendants, including Maoist) ideology, which advertise themselves as being Marxist as well, but Leninism sharply deviates from Marxism on a number of key points largely because Marxism is grounded in the necessity of starting with mature capitalism, and Lenin wanted a shortcut for the USSR (and later movements following Lenin likewise sought to bypass, rather than develope through and from, mature capitalism.) Also, recognition of the existence of the conflict within capitalism that Marx’s proposals sought to address isn't the same thing as advocating Marxism.
- fakename11 6y ago“That Wasn't Real Socialism”
- dragonwriter 6y agoWhether or not Leninism is real Socialism is a different question (there's a reason, though, why other socialists, including Marxists, have called it State Capitalism, though.)! What is undisputable is that these are three different things: 1. Recognizing the conflict between labor and capital as a real and significant factor in capitalist society, and 2. Advocating Marxism, and 3. Advocating Leninism. The societies in which Marxism has been most broadly applied are the developed “capitalist” societies, which have generally evolved from what Marx described as capitalism to what has been called (among other things) as “the modern mixed economy”, by adopting both elements of programs of various (in many cases, Marxist) critics of capitalism, or compromise positions. There are also societies, which never were mature capitalist societies, that have tried to bypass mature capitalism and apply the Leninist course. Advocates laissez-faire capitalism like to point to these as a broad argument against socialism, while advocates of non-Leninist socialism tend to point to them as as arguments against the Leninism as a useful approach to socialism, whether or not they accept it as a genuine socialism.
- darawk 6y ago
- dang 6y agoPlease don't take HN threads further into generic ideological flamewar. It's extremely tedious and predictable and usually turns nasty. We're trying for something quite different on HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- fastball 6y agoYeah, pretty sure shooting people is not what GC meant by "every opportunity".
- throwaway2048 6y agoI wouldn't be so sure these days
- CryptoPunk 6y ago>>We've tried this. People died over it. We enacted laws to prevent it from happening, so that labor can stand on equal ground with capital. This is simply not true, except in the most pedantic and disingenuous sense. There were violent strikes by some groups of unionized workers, that broke the law, and that resulted in some deaths, if that's what you're referring to. There is absolutely no reason this thuggery should have been rewarded by giving the strikers what they demanded, which was the abrogation of the company owners' private property and contracting rights. As it happened, US industry, and with it US wages, grew much faster before society gave into the unions, when the US was still a free market where people had a sacred right to freely contract.