this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
886 points (80.5% liked)

Memes

45730 readers
1498 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Transcendant@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I'm lower-left quadrant but always cop a fair amount of shit from others on 'the left' (nebulous term though it is) for my feelings on capitalism. The people I speak to have never seen anything but corruption, and have a combo of zero faith and utter hatred for it.

My personal feelings are that with strong, enforced checks & balances, capitalism can be combined with socialist policies to create a fantastic standard of living (see Norway), without it becoming cancerous. Unfortunately most of our western political systems (and capitalism is strongly influenced by political systems) seem to be run on a wink and a nudge, an assumed sense of 'fair play' which we all know has been shown to be worthless in recent years.

Strong unions; an educated populace; politicians who actually give a shit; this is what we need. But, capitalism has an absolute stranglehold on the populace of most western countries via print / tv media. The foxes are in charge of the henhouse and the hens are getting shit on.

[–] dannoffs@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're getting shit from leftists because you're doing the "socialism is when the government does stuff" just from the other side.

[–] thoro@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And referencing the "political compass" unironically.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What matters is the ability the allocate resources according to the needs of us all and that people have confidence in future resources to be happy. Private ownership is contrary to the first; it helps with the second. That is any "capitalism" must be limited to pertonal needs.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Who decides what constitutes a "need"? Will this proposed society be based purely on subsistence?

[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

You and those whose needs would cause their needs to go unmet.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Aaaaand that's how communism ---> dictatorship

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Socialism has many of the same benefits as capitalism. It's also compatible with other systems. A socialist country can take with a capitalist. I have no issue with slowly moving toward socialist but I don't think there is much to be gained in protecting capitalism.

[–] Transcendant@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This I think is a key part of misunderstandings... I'm not trying to protect capitalism, I'm trying to be realistic in how we go about modifying society towards more socialist goals. We're not going to upend the global capitalist systems in our lifetime, I don't think. And imo things are going to get worse before they get better, as wealth continues to be concentrated in fewer hands, as productivity increases due to further automation. I hope the tipping point isn't something that causes massive loss of life, like the collapse of civilisation.

It's like... imagine you have a lake filled with crocodiles, sharks, and jellyfish. We need to get to the other side. Wanting to get there isn't enough, we need a solution. We can just keep endlessly pushing people in expecting them to somehow cross the lake (trying to 'destroy' capitalism), or we can build a bridge across (slowly modify capitalism to have strongs checks and balances). Anyway it's just my personal opinion, I stand by it

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I fail to see how anything you said was useful in that I already admitted that it would need to be gradual, so you spent a lot of time on an entirely unnecessary analogy and thensome. However, you offered none of that in your initial comment. You just said that capitalism could still work. If there was any misunderstanding, it was on you for not sharing something you expected people to magically already know.

[–] Transcendant@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No need to get pissy, I was just trying to re-explain myself in a way you'd understand.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have no issue with slowly moving toward socialist but I don't think there is much to be gained in protecting capitalism.

That was my reply to you about not needing to be a socialist society to have socialist policies. I clearly understand the principle of gradual change without childish analogies that waste everyone's time. You mention nothing in your comment about gradual change. Simply that we don't need a socialist society. Don't become condescending when people can't read your mind due to your inability to communicate. See how few words I used to discuss gradual change? No need for childish condescension for such a simple idea.

[–] MrShankles@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Don't be a dick. You just wasted my time with elitist shit about how smart you are. You mad because they said "don't be pissy"?

Well ya sounded pissy to me, and you're doing an even better job of it now. Be better than that

You are not a leftist is probably why.