10 ms·

I agree with what you wrote, but I'm not sure why you would think that I'm missing anything. I think many who post comments alluding to this nebulous capitalis

I agree with what you wrote, but I'm not sure why you would think that I'm missing anything. I think many who post comments alluding to this nebulous capitalist ruling elite would say that education of lower classes is tainted by capitalist dogma and therefore would be invalid. Who writes the textbooks? Capitalist businesses seeking to make a profit. Who approves the textbooks? Oh the capitalist ruling elite. Etc. The reason I am asking these questions is because I keep seeing drive-by comments about "capitalism" and "ruling elites", and I'm trying to understand what other countries out there have different ruling elites (or none) and what the call to action is. Some complain that the "people" aren't in charge and instead it is these capitalist masters/elites. Are there any countries where the people are actually in charge? What does that mean for the people to be in charge? Or are people just trolling and trying to aggravate others with these types of comments?

klibertp 4y ago
> why you would think that I'm missing anything. Because your other comments were rather light in content, you know? It's hard to piece together a full picture of what you mean without you taking the time to actually write it down... :) To be perfectly honest, I can't help you here - I have no idea what does it matter whether the ruling class is capitalist, aristocratic, teocratic, military, or whatever other ways of getting power there are. Maybe people think that some ways of getting power are... I don't know, inherently better in the moral sense? Is that really important? I think what matters is how the ruling elite behaves. The drive-by comments about how it's capitalism that makes workers in SK miserable are severely misguided, in my opinion. Reading - as a hobby - about history of East Asia, I would say it's the opposite: the ruling class became capitalist, without really changing their behavior, or (the most important part) the reasons underlying their behavior and acceptance of it by society at large. I thought you're missing that bit, because you focused heavily on the ruling elite being this or that, while I think the topic here is not about what it is, but what it does, and how the other people view and react to what the elites do. You mentioned America/USA, so I wanted to point out the huge difference between the thinking of the majority in the "land of the free" on their minority elites vs. in South Korea and some other Asian countries. Because I don't see a huge difference between capitalists or other kinds of elites, I missed the reason why you focused on that part of the argument. At best, I thought the comments about evil capitalists were a kind of virtue signalling (look, that's what capitalism wants for all of us! we need to do something! or something like that). I don't think anyone did that to aggravate anyone or you personally, it's just that people often don't have the 2 cents to add to the discussion, but still want to do it, so they borrow a talking point (a dime a dozen) and throw that in.

klibertp 4y ago

> why you would think that I'm missing anything. Because your other comments were rather light in content, you know? It's hard to piece together a full picture of what you mean without you taking the time to actually write it down... :) To be perfectly honest, I can't help you here - I have no idea what does it matter whether the ruling class is capitalist, aristocratic, teocratic, military, or whatever other ways of getting power there are. Maybe people think that some ways of getting power are... I don't know, inherently better in the moral sense? Is that really important? I think what matters is how the ruling elite behaves. The drive-by comments about how it's capitalism that makes workers in SK miserable are severely misguided, in my opinion. Reading - as a hobby - about history of East Asia, I would say it's the opposite: the ruling class became capitalist, without really changing their behavior, or (the most important part) the reasons underlying their behavior and acceptance of it by society at large. I thought you're missing that bit, because you focused heavily on the ruling elite being this or that, while I think the topic here is not about what it is, but what it does, and how the other people view and react to what the elites do. You mentioned America/USA, so I wanted to point out the huge difference between the thinking of the majority in the "land of the free" on their minority elites vs. in South Korea and some other Asian countries. Because I don't see a huge difference between capitalists or other kinds of elites, I missed the reason why you focused on that part of the argument. At best, I thought the comments about evil capitalists were a kind of virtue signalling (look, that's what capitalism wants for all of us! we need to do something! or something like that). I don't think anyone did that to aggravate anyone or you personally, it's just that people often don't have the 2 cents to add to the discussion, but still want to do it, so they borrow a talking point (a dime a dozen) and throw that in.