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?
Name:
Anonymous2011-11-20 12:29
>>240
The problem is corporations are private. I'm not bothered by the fact I can never join a penguin "corporation", I'm troubled by the exclusive privileges given to board members of fortune 500 companies, I want to force them to compete with scientists and entrepeneurs who are far better than them. I don't care if they retire with their billions, I just want to strip them of their authority and see them compete on a level playing field.
Name:
Anonymous2011-11-20 12:56
>>229
Yeah, indeed the irony of most capitalists is that, while they respect the right of all people to be capitalists, they don't want all people be capitalists.
Name:
Anonymous2011-11-20 13:09
>>241
>I just want to strip them of their authority and see them compete on a level playing field.
That would be stripping them of their rightful discretions over their own property/possessions. I suppose, a way around this, would be to prohibiting them from investing to begin with, or something, which is weird.
Name:
Anonymous2011-11-20 13:29
>>232
I started using "dis," when it was up while "boards" was down, now I'm slightly hooked because threads die too quickly on the image boards due to abundant and frequent creations of new threads.
Name:
Anonymous2011-11-20 19:53
>>243
They should not be prohibited from investing or exercising controlling stakes if that is what the majority of shareholders want, I merely wish to strip corporations of any advantages confered onto them by the state. When bloomberg has headlines like this I don't think anyone is debating whether market forces are under threat.
You or I will never be able to receive all this cheap credit, favorable laws and insider information, this is not competition, in fact it's technically communism.
We are often told that the rich somehow work with their minds; that they are great innovators. This is usually a lie. The majority of the rich do not innovate. They hire people to innovate for them – just like they hire people to make things for them.
Think of the building of homes, for example, which is one of the largest industries in the U.S. Who builds houses? Construction workers. Who designs the houses and invents new ways to build them? Architects, who are also workers. And what do the owners and CEOs of real estate conglomerates contribute to all this? Absolutely nothing.
Just look around you. Chances are that all the objects you can see right now were built by low-income workers employed in factories and designed or invented by middle-income workers employed in corporate research and development departments. Their rich bosses had almost nothing to do with it--they just profited from other people's work.
>>247 >>248
Don't start tripping on me because I'm not apologising for the current status quo, I'm just saying what has to be said. Capital allocation or "ownership over the means of production" is work, you have to figure out what the best investments are so that the profits are greater than inflation and taxation, even if this means allocating capital into a hedge fund (or mutual fund or bank) to allocate the capital for you, essentially that's still a form of capital allocation.
The problem is lack of competition, without arbitrary restrictions on competition there would be no cartel of investment banks like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, the service of capital allocation would also be far more efficient resulting in more entrepeneurship, more effective investment in research and a better ability to handle economic diversification and sophistication, all of which resulting in more jobs in the long term and generally ending the waste of trillions on bubbles and white elephants. Also their wages would be driven down to upper-middle class levels while hedge funds would run on gas until their owners die, which is what you were more interested in I suppose.
So we really need to exterminate keynesian economics and it's offshoots which are essentially a set of logical fallacies that give the state the political capital it needs to get away with this massive scam. For instance a common logical fallacy is the belief that regulations which are essentially kickbacks by investment banksters are the same as regulations for public safety and to prevent fraud, obviously the solution is to make the distinction clear so people can see that these particular regulations are not in their interest even if other regulations are.
Name:
Anonymous2011-11-25 2:35
>So we really need to exterminate keynesian economics
Yes. Black hole economics is fail.
You will keep your capitalism because it's benefiting you, you fucking cheating crook who pretends to have "worked his ass off".
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-13 15:06
>>258
I work at a supermarket for 6 days a week. I probably earn less money a month than you do a week.
>>257
At the cost of improving automation technology.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-13 18:30
>>255
Are you trying to string together as many non-sequiturs as possible? Capitalism doesn't even necessitate that there be no regulation, so even your basic premise is flawed.
>>258
Implying that someone is a benefit spongers based on no evidence what-so-ever? Not exactly breaking the mould on desperate retorts today. I think I'll keep capitalism because I am rewarded on merit, not on my sense of entitlement and dependence.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-22 20:36
Capitalists want to create a world with no public property so stepping outside of your own home will be illegal because you'll be trespassing on someone else's private property. There will be no public roads, no public sidewalks, no public parks, no public police, no public fire fighters, no publicly owned utilities, etc.
Prove me wrong.
In capitalism the people who already own the capital and private property have the "freedom" to do business with whoever they want for any reason they want with no regard to the merit or intelligence of their potential employees.
Nothing is regulated. Therefore nothing in the economy is "automatic". Therefore nothing is guaranteed. Therefore nothing is earned. Therefore nothing involves merit. Therefore nothing is fair.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-23 0:10
>Prove me wrong.
Okay: public roads exist; sidewalks are tended to by the adjacent property owner typically, with help from public utilities, but are public enough; public parks exist. I don't know what the heck a "public police" or a "public firefighter" is so I can't counter that one without feeling silly, but there are police and firefighters.
>Nothing is regulated. Therefore nothing in the economy is "automatic". Therefore nothing is guaranteed. Therefore nothing is earned. Therefore nothing involves merit. Therefore nothing is fair.
You lost me at "nothing is earned." If it were automatic and guaranteed, how would something be "earned?" you'd get it whether or not there was merit or whether it was fair that you'd be (able to) get it.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-23 1:27
>>261
Ridiculous, no one profits from such a scenario.
And once again, your basic "nothing is regulated" premise is flawed and again, followed by a string of non-sequiturs.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-23 21:26
>>1
You're always free to open a commune, where everything will be in common use. You can even emit your own money (U.S. law allows that).
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-24 22:44
Nice copypaste OP, I saw it posted on other forums. Capitalism is the idea that your right to own property is sacred and nothing more than that.
You can't blame Capitalism for the bad decisions of your government.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-25 12:09
>Capitalism didn't exist until the late 19th century.
>Supporting capitalism is "conservative".
>Capitalism is "human nature".
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-25 14:07
capitalism is when the jews import national minorities, which rob you, rape your wife and beat your son.
communism is when only the jews, national minorities and mongrels can get any important and profitable job. mongrels and interracial marriages are also receive bonuses from government.
socialism is when the jews and the niggers live on welfare and you serve them for free.
nazism is when you are allowed to send the jews and the national minorities into a gas chamber.
Name:
Anonymous2012-05-25 15:10
>>267
I see we are graced with the presence of a real professor of political and economic philosophy here.
Ah, don't worry about it. We have a guy here who spams Jew hate into every single thread without any rhyme or reason.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-11 18:35
>>273
So as long as his Jew hate rhymed, it would be ok?
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-13 5:36
>>273
Everyone has a reason to hate Jews: Chinese hate Jews for opium trade and famines; Europeans hate Jews for infiltrating their countries and seizing everything; Arabs hate Jews for amorality and every single war in middle east; Koreans hate Jews for butchering Korea in half; Germans hate Jews for lost World Wars, Weimar Republic and reparations; Japanese hate Jews for nuclear bombing and lost WW2; Slavs hate Jews for every misfortune since year 988. Even Christianity and Islam are the reasons to hate Jews, if you're a Pagan or an Atheist: Jews killed millions of pagans back then.
Name:
Anonymous2012-06-13 5:51
>>275
Weimar Republic had to take enormous loans from the USA Jewish bankers to pay reparations and also pay in the form of coal, iron and other resources. As a result, there was a shortage of coal in Germany. Commoners didn’t have enough coal for heating and cooking.