Fuck Capitalism

Capitalism, capitalism. How do I loath thee? Let me count the ways….

Few would argue with the conclusion that greed, selfishness, ruthlessness, and egocentrism are qualities that all of us humans possess, to varying degrees of course. Equally compelling is the argument that nearly all of us are capable of acting with kindness, compassion, justice, honesty, generosity, and empathy. Yet despite the sweeping epidemic of unnecessary suffering caused by torrential waves of avarice, self-centeredness, and brutality, our filthy moneyed elite, their well-compensated sycophants, and countless millions of deeply inculcated members of the working class defend the sacred cow of capitalism with the zeal of the Sicarii. What a brilliant way to conduct human affairs and organize ourselves socioeconomically! Not only do we embrace the inevitability of our human frailties; we willfully and perpetually embrace a system that ensures that the worst elements of the human psyche will predominate AND which amply rewards those who act the most reprehensibly.

One of the idiocies advanced as a logical argument to justify the continued existence of the abomination of capitalism is that while it may be flawed, it is still better than any alternative. If capitalism is the best humanity can do, it's time to cash in our chips and leave Earth to our non-human animal counter-parts. They may not have opposable thumbs and formidably sized frontal lobes, but at least they don't engage in the systematic destruction of themselves and the rest of the planet. However, before we act too hastily and engage in mass seppuku, perhaps it would make more sense to implement a mass reorganization of our socioeconomic structure, basing the new paradigm on far more egalitarian, sustainable, democratic, just, and rational principles. Or we could just keep destroying each other and the fucking planet….

Perhaps most disturbing of all is the way in which capitalism's relentless advocates have managed to bamboozle billions of people into equating it with democracy. Diabolical to its core, but sheer genius nonetheless. Concluding that capitalism and democracy are somehow synonymous is a bit like saying that Dick Cheney and the milk of human kindness relate to one another in even a very remote fashion. (Have you seen the myriad pictures of his evil grimaces floating around the Internet? Despicable creature that he is, he doesn't even attempt to mask his malevolence). Capitalism is naturally hierarchical, authoritarian, and brutal. Corporations, the legal vehicles for the plutocracy to maximize their profits while minimizing liability, are structured as tyrannies. What the hell is democratic about dog eat dog, law of the jungle, and every man for himself? Besides, if we uber-capitalists here in the United States are truly "democratic," and we "elected" a depraved idiot like W. to what is ostensibly the most powerful position in the world, what does that say about us?

>>125
Most if not all "recorded" history has been under "statist" type of societies so i would understand if there was few to no examples of a total free market. The only reason the U.S. grew so much at its inception was because it was a qwazi free market at some point before all the state regulations, specifically the restrictions on foreign trade.
That was also a time where you had child labor, no workplace safety regulations, etc. Not exactly a time that people want to go back to.
Well like i said, there was a point in time where there was stateless societies and for the most part they worked fine like medieval Ireland until England finally invaded it hundreds of years later.
As much as Cromwell may have been a bastard to the Irish, I can't say that it has been entirely a bad thing (ignoring The Troubles, and all the other political bullshit). Ireland also had a primitive form of monarchy during the medieval era, so I don't think it is as "stateless" as you're claiming it to be. Perhaps weakly statist, but so was over half of Europe at the time.
I wouldn't say anti statism is "as" untenable because marxism requires taking control of the state first to dissolve it while most other forms of anti statism acknowledge that the best way to dissolve it is through education and tolerance for mostly anything but statism.
See, that seems to make as much sense as "once communism is achieved, the state will magically wither away", which pretty much means that in practice, has no basis in reality. When it comes down to it, it's all just theory. It's a nice theory, but that's about it.
Statism is tenable in the short run for sure but in the long run.....well lets just say that the U.S.(which can be said to be one of the best "states" if not the best) will most definitely fall in our lifetime.
The US on its current path (if no major change happens) is doomed to break up like the former Soviet Union, in which case the individual states will end up being their own republics (think Vermont before it entered the Union). There will still be "statism", but it'll be more decentralized and local. Or, such states will coalesce together and keep the name (instead of 50 states, you now have half that).
Also, I wouldn't say that the US is one of the best, or the best state. When you have huge income inequalities, rising obesity, decline in literacy, numeracy, a burgeoning culture of anti-intellectualism, a religious minority gaining more strength in the political system, and culture, etc. The US' neighbors in the anglosphere are also suffering under similar problems, but not anywhere as bad as the US is, and certainly that goes for countries in continental Europe, and while none of these places have governments as  bureaucratic as the US', they aren't exactly "free market", either.