3 ms·
>That capitalism logically implies that the rich become richer? I don't think this is necessarily the case, It doesn't need to imply anything. It's an ideology
by coldtea 9mo ago
>That capitalism logically implies that the rich become richer? I don't think this is necessarily the case,
It doesn't need to imply anything. It's an ideology, those promoting it will say whatever BS attracts people to it. In practice, what is happening in capitalist countries since 1970s (when they abandoned all pretense) is that the rich get way richer and everybody else is fucked.
- glitchc 9mo agoVersus what exactly? Communism? Where the rich got richer faster and people got fucked faster?
- coldtea 9mo agoThey taught you the only two altenatives are 1917 style communism or 2026 style capitalism? Talk about a crap educational system.
- senordevnyc 9mo agoWhat is happening in capitalist countries since 1970s (when they abandoned all pretense) is that the rich get way richer and everybody else is fucked. So then what has been happening in non-capitalist countries since the 1970s, so we can compare?
- glitchc 9mo agoProven outcomes in the real world matter, not hypotheticals in a textbook. Can you provide clear examples of successful communist nations where you would be willing to live and raise children, or is this just pseudo-intellectualism?
- int_19h 9mo agoAll communist nations have implemented the same exact narrow subset of the ideology that we know as Marxism-Leninism. The reason being that everyone else who tried something more e.g. democratic generally got crushed. So the commies that ended up running countries in the real world were the most ruthless, hyper-violent ones.
- glitchc 9mo agoRight. To me the conclusion is that communist theory is fatally flawed. Real world application shows that every real, practical communist system will rely on hyper-violence and ruthlessness to preserve itself. Therefore the average person is better off in a capitalist system than a communist one. Can you refute this conclusion?
- int_19h 9mo agoI don't see how that is a logical conclusion. Again, we're talking about the time when communist parties were literally banned most everywhere, and even talking about that stuff was sufficient to lock people up. Why are you surprised that this process selected for hyper-violence? And why do you project its results to different circumstances?
- pixl97 9mo agoAt the end of the day Capitalism and Communism have nothing to do with authoritarianism and liberalism/democracy. An authoritarian capitalist country is a perfectly valid type of government as there has never existed a 'pure' capitalistic governed country.