3 ms·
It is irrelevant if the object of the calling agrees or not on the name. Otherwise nobody would ever be called anything bad.
by mejutoco 4y ago
It is irrelevant if the object of the calling agrees or not on the name. Otherwise nobody would ever be called anything bad.
- Natsu 4y agoThat only works if you have some way to justify it to begin with and is rather transphobic to make other people the sole arbiters of one's identity.
- mejutoco 4y agoExtreme wealth concentration (the original claim) seems pretty easy to prove in the cases originally mentioned by another poster.
- Natsu 4y agoI mean, sure, that's what happens literally any time you set up a super-powerful government, necessarily including any government powerful enough to redistribute all of a society's resources. See also: company towns, Pol Pot, the Kims, Mao, or what was happening in that rebellious colony called the USA before the citizens stopped it. But claiming it fits a bespoke definition of "capitalism" seemingly invented for this particular discussion, despite that being against literally everything they professed, seems a bit much. They didn't end up with extreme wealth concentration by letting people freely exchange goods and services. That usually happens when people take control of who is able to exchange goods, whether via monopolies or government control.