Define "Capitalism"

The word "Capitalism" is used differently by it's opponents and supporters and others. In fact, I've seen definitions ranging from "The system of corporate power and relative lack of support for the poor", "Any system where Capital plays a major factor" (the author of that definition called communism a form of capitalism, showing how confused the definition is), "A free market with private property", and a few others.

When people calling themselves "Capitalists" use the word, they're talking about a relatively free market with a relative scarcity of collective property and mostly privately owned means of production.

When people calling themselves "Communists" use the word, they're talking about an exploitive system of corporate profits, worker oppression, and a wide gap between the rich and the poor.

Call me crazy, but these are not the same thing at all. They aren't mutually exclusive, but nor are they inable to exist without the other. The communist definition of capitalism applies better to Fascism than what a Capitalist is talking about. And it's possible to have private ownership of the means of production without having corporations.

When commie libs and capitalist pigs argue about "Capitalism" they're talking about two totally different things.

Obviously nobody here advocates the oppression of the poor and a massive class gap.

Discuss.

>>40
Which doesn't contradict what I said.

Perhaps most psychopaths are egocentric, but not all egocentrists are psychopathic.

In any case, it's merely a defamation of egocentrism, which doesn't refute it.

>>41
But it means that what you said about food is irrelevant. So admit you made a mistake and come up with better logical analogies in the future.

>>41

If I was egocentric, I would have had made the assumption that somehow I was more important than everyone else. Is that reasonable? Am I really all that better than anyone else? Just because I'm me? That seems like an arbitrary distinction.

>>14
it's just Anarchism described from an economic perspective. Anarchism is fail when applied to dense groups of people. It has never been shown to work in a modern context.

>>44

There's no real reason why it couldn't work except that people aren't ready for it yet. The agorist revolution brings anarchy about by preparing people for it.

>>45
LOL idealists, I'd sooner dream of real robo catgirls. At least it's scientifically possible.

>>46
plausible even

>>46

Anarchy is scientifically possible also.

Really, I think the best way to make it actually work is a seastead community. But those happen to not exist at the moment.

>>39
Agorism has a lot in common with communism I see. Russia, China and North Korea wasn't very good places for it. We should try it in a better suited place.

Normal people eat food as well, normal people are not/less egocentric.
Oh, and you should probably learn that egocentrism means you don't care about anything unless it in anyway effect you. And that you have no sympathy, can’t live yourself in other peoples situations.

You people are stuck in some abstract mind set where nothing is uncertain and everything revolves around the free market or worker's councils and anyone who disagrees with you is a demon and anyone who agrees with you is an angel. If you continue to think like that the only government you can create is some inefficient psychotic despotism.

>>39
LOL Somalia!! Are there too many nigras for agorism to work there? Or is it that agorism just never works, outside the minds of agorists? AND SPAWN MOAR WARLORDZ

>>49
>>51
No matter what system you give Somalia, it's going to fail anyways. When the result of failure will occur independant of the system used, you can't say the system caused the failure. You could try giving them a modern democracy, like the UN tried, and the somalis will just tear it down and go back to warlords. Capitalism, Fascism, Socialism, Democracy, Anarchy, Communism, nothing will work in Somalia because Somalia is just a shithole. Subsaharan africa is a big shithole. Taking an example that will never work and is supposedly a certain system (it isn't agorism) does not prove that the certain system doesn't work. It just proves that it didn't work that time in that place.

>>49
I think of egocentrism as focusing primarily on oneself as opposed to focusing primarily on others. It doesn't mean absolute apathy towards others. I consider myself egocentric and I do care about others, but I'll tolerate whatever they want to do unless it hurts me. I don't consider it an illogical or evil or psychotic position to hold to the principle of not hurting other people that aren't hurting you.

>>52
I’m not going to gloat and say I took psychology classes, but I did, and there I got a fairly good explanation on egocentrism. I think you should look it up.

>>52

Of course, why should you be more focused on yourself? Is there a good reason for it? Unless there is, it is illogical.

>>54
Because I know what my needs are with certainty. I do not know other people's needs, nor do they know mine. I can most adequately have all my needs provided to my own satisfaction without waste by providing them for myself, and others can have their own needs provided best to their own satisfaction without waste by providing them for themselves.

>>52
No, if yu believe that somalia would fail any system and not just agorism you should actually back it up. The burden of proof is in your courtyard so to speak. And claiming that all of sub saharan africa cant have agorism begs the question quite violently. And yes, i got that you belice its a shithole, no repeating please.

>>55

Really? How do you really know what your own needs are? You could think that you NEED that next hit of heroin. At the same time you could also know for certain that starving children in Ethiopia NEED a healthy meal. Your premise doesn't hold up.

>>56

Empirical evidence for this is kinda difficult to get, but it's my personal belief that Somalia will persist as shithole capital of the world unless something really crazy happens. And I didn't say all of sub-saharan africa wouldn't work under agorism. I just said all of sub-saharan africa is a giant shithole and no system will magically change it's shitholedom. Anarchy can certainly help some of them, but to say that any system is a failure because it can't turn the shithole of shitholes into an industrialized nation in a decade is unfair.

Somalia's GDP is up 500% since the government was overthrown in 1991. It's still a shithole, but it's a slightly less shitty hole, and government sure as hell wasn't responsible for that growth. That's the closest thing I can have to evidence at this point. It's not something you can test under laboratory conditions.

>>57

I know what I want, how badly I want it, and how much I want.

Nobody else knows this.
I know this for nobody else.

In all other cases, all we have is best guesses.

>>59

And I'm saying that there is no evidence that you really know yourself better than anyone else. You have to make guesses about yourself just as much as you have to make guesses about other people.

>>60

Yes there is evidence. Experience. I know what I want. When I buy something, I am happy that I bought it. When I recieve gifts, I am not always happy. Because other people do not know what I want, they only have best guesses.

>>58
Tell that to the Somalians, I'm sure the 3 of them who are actually making money will be happy to hear it.

>>61 When I buy something, I am happy that I bought it.

This isn't true all the time either.

>>62
More than three of them are making money.

>>63
Yes it is. Otherwise I wouldn't buy it.

>>64

So you've never experienced regret for doing something you did for yourself?

>>65
Not when I did it. After some time I regret not having spent the money on something else, but others are not better than me at predicting when my wants or needs will change, so the fact that I have imperfect knowledge of the future does not disqualify what I said, as everyone has imperfect knowledge of the future.

>>66
>> I regret what I did but technically it's not regret because at the time it was an impulse buy and I was happy for all of 10 mins until I realised what a idiot I was, and if I could do it again I certainly would.

Fixed.

>>65
You can't argue with people about their feelings, there's nothing to argue about

>>67

I'm just trying to make the point that no one really knows what they want -- at least, not all of the time.

>>67
I'm not an impulse buyer. I buy very little, actually. Although some people certainly are impulse buyers, but then if they don't value what they have as much as it's value anymore, they could just sell it.

>>68

And nobody really knows that anybody else wants...hardly ever. They just have best guesses. There is more guesswork (and therefore greater chance of waste) when another person is buying for someone than there is when the someone is buying for themselves.

Capitalism generally refers to an economic system in which the means of production are mostly privately or corporately owned and operated for profit and in which distribution, production and pricing of goods and services are determined in a largely free market. It is usually considered to involve the right of individuals and groups of individuals acting as "legal persons" or corporations to trade capital goods, labor and money (see finance and credit). The term also refers to several theories that developed in the context of the Industrial Revolution and the Cold War meant to explain, justify, or critique the private ownership of capital; to explain the operation of capitalistic markets; and to guide the application or elimination of government regulation of property and markets. (See economics, political economy, laissez-faire.)

......copypasta

Capitalism=gays

you have a point...

>>71
LOOLOLOLOL OMG IT'S TRUE UP IN OUR SKYSCRAPERS WE GET INTO TIGHT LEATHER SCHLONG SUCK AND BUTTSECHS FUKKEN HARD GAY

THEN WE GET BACK INTO OUR OFFICE SUITS AND LEAVE 1 BY 1 AS IF WE WERE HARD AT WORK AND NO ONE NOTICES!!!!

Capitalism = I get the most shit. So HA!!!