After the failure of capitalism

[Trotskylvania]

Capitalism is not a moribund system. And even on the eve of the revolution, it won't be a moribund system. It's not capitalism's failures that inspire class conflict, but rather its dynamism. Marx made this quite clear in Capital

It's good that you would admit that.

It's not an admission, and I don't get why you would consider that to be some sort of damning self-admission. The communists and socialists who considered capitalism a dying, moribund system were wrong in the 1890s, wrong in the late teens to early 1920s, wrong in the 1930s and wrong in the late 40s. And they're wrong now. And not even quoting from the master, like so many leftists do, can justify this analysis of capitalism.

It doesn't change the proper reasons for rejecting capitalism. The rejection of capitalism must be for moral reasons: it's commodification of every aspect of life, the atomization of human society, the obliteration of the individual through labor-alienation as well as self-commodification.

[L3 Communications]

I've always imagined the US being under a pseudo-communist economy, then being brought back into capitalist regime.

Quite an imagination you have...

[The Ben Boys]

Okay, let's try process of elimination:

Fascism- For the FATHERLAND!!!
Communism- It good on paper, sucks in practice.
Monarchy- It works, until it doesn't.
Feudalism- I don't even need to say anything.

Democracy- It's the worst form of government, unless you count all the others.

[Grave_n_idle]

Like what?

What would you have to change, that would sufficiently alter the model that it was no longer communism?

Get rid of Statelessness, Classlessness, lack of Private Property, free access to needs, etc.

Afterwords, that would be Capitalism, or perhaps some form of Socialism. But Capitalism has failings of it's own. Remove all of it's failings, and you no longer have Capitalism.

Even if we assume that statelessness is required (it's not intrinsic to all forms of communism, obviously) - how would it's absence create capitalism? It wouldn't... and you actually make that point yourself, and then admit that it would be flawed if it was, and... I'm not sure what your point was supposed to be.

Classlessness is a failure in communism?

[Trotskylvania]

Okay, let's try process of elimination:

Fascism- For the FATHERLAND!!!
Communism- It good on paper, sucks in practice.
Monarchy- It works, until it doesn't.
Feudalism- I don't even need to say anything.

Democracy- It's the worst form of government, unless you count all the others.

Communism is an economic system, and the feudal socio-economic system is primarily defined by it's economic factors more than its political structure.

[Conserative Morality]

GnI - Statelessness alone does not make communism but the combinations of all the aforementioned traits. To remove all Communism's faults would be to merely replace them with another, and the same applies to Capitalism. Most percieved faults of systems are only faults to certain people, and then even only from certain points of view. As such, Communism's failings are also it's defining traits and redeeming features. No system or subset of a system is perfect, or even objectively good.

[Sociobiology]

Anarchy & private police aren't "conservative", especially anarchy (which is very progressive), and socialism & communism aren't innately authoritarian. Also, there are other options besides corporate and government control. Other than that, you make good points. I'd describe myself as market-oriented, individualist, and progressive.

anarchy is free market, maybe individualist is a better word, but it is a market with no restrictions and few to no social services which is anarchy in the literal sense.

both socialism and communism is authoritarian in that the government decides what you deserve/get as far as goods and resources. in communism it goes one step further and also decides what you do.

[Sociobiology]

Caitalism doesn't work neither does communism thats why there are no first world communist or capitalism (or socialist or fascist)countries all that works is a mixed economic system. private ownership with government controls.
name a first world country and a guarantee you thats what they use.


1. Communism
An economic and political system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the centralized organization of labor and goods for the common advantage of all members based on need

2. Socialism
An economic system system characterized by the collective ownership of property with a centralized distribution of goods based on labor the individual puts in

3. Capitalism
An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

[JJ Place]

Not even close, and no.

Capitalism is always on the verge of collapse, by it's very nature. It is inherently unstable and capricious.

Capitalism, economies of Capitalism, are doing just fine and a incredibly resilient. Capitalism, if it was always on the verge of collapse, would have crumbled millenia ago; If Capitalism was always on the verge of collapse, that would mean that any event or negative occurance to happen would throw Capitalism over the edge and destroy the economic system; however every single negative happening does not collapse Capitalism. Environments, both those of nature, and those of economics, are far more resilient than many parties give them credit for being. Capitalism isn't in a perpetual state of near collapse, it's quite enough resilient.

That's actually (also) it's greatest strength, so it's nonsensical to deny it.

Would you please elaborate, Grave_n_idle?

I would like to see a socialist country in the future, but i dont think capitalism is failing enough currently. Also i think it is better if we get a socialist society by winning elections instead of waiting until capitalism collapses.

Cool, because nobody's going to vote for you.

And waiting for Capitalism is collapse is going to take awhile. Shortly after Eternity, to be precise, if you want to wait for the complete collapse of Capitalism.

[JJ Place]

Caitalism doesn't work neither does communism thats why there are no first world communist or capitalism (or socialist or fascist)countries all that works is a mixed economic system. private ownership with government controls.
name a first world country and a guarantee you thats what they use.


1. Communism
An economic and political system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the centralized organization of labor and goods for the common advantage of all members based on need

2. Socialism
An economic system system characterized by the collective ownership of property with a centralized distribution of goods based on labor the individual puts in

3. Capitalism
An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

The most prosperous societies in the world are not Mixed Economies, they're Capitalist economies with small elements of Socialism mixed in the economy. A truly mixed economy would have an equal mix of both Socialism and Capitalism intertwined within the economic system, the wealthiest, most prosperous , and greatest economies on Earth hold far greater amounts of Capitalism than Socialism within the society. Even Europe is made up of mainly Capitalist countries, with only one nation in all of Europe being predominantly Socialist as opposed to predominantly Capitalist; and that's merely a slightly center-left wing economy, not even a truly Socialist economy, such as North Korea.

[Greed and Death]

You got it wrong social democracy is failing. That's why Europe is electing the more right leaning, this trend will continue until pure laissez-faire come about. Those protesting represent a shrinking minority, and are reactionaries.
They must be put down at all cost summary execution by corporate police forces will soon occur.

In b4 someone takes you seriously.

I see you started early today.

Cheers!

It is the holiday season.

[Wamitoria]

The most prosperous societies in the world are not Mixed Economies, they're Capitalist economies with small elements of Socialism mixed in the economy.

I believe that that still counts as a Mixed Economy.

[JJ Place]

The most prosperous societies in the world are not Mixed Economies, they're Capitalist economies with small elements of Socialism mixed in the economy.

I believe that that still counts as a Mixed Economy.

It means that it's a mainly Capitalist nation; a mixed economy would be an economy with a near even mix of both Socialism and Capitalism, not an economy with traces of one economic system and a predominance of the opposite economic system.

[Trotskylvania]

I believe that that still counts as a Mixed Economy.

It means that it's a mainly Capitalist nation; a mixed economy would be an economy with a near even mix of both Socialism and Capitalism, not an economy with traces of one economic system and a predominance of the opposite economic system.

40 percent of the American GDP is in the state sector. States and municipalities employ hundreds of thousands of people, whose primary job is to plan zoning, public infrastructure, and tax policy to best attract business to that locality.

Even if we were to accept your ahistorical definition of capitalism as an economy with private ownership and a free market system, then how is the US, or any other successful Western nation a "mostly capitalist economy". Because from where I'm standing, that looks like a planned economy to me.

[Our Lady GaGa]

Capitalism won't fail. There are always abuses in the system, but capitalism is the least crappy we've found so far. It promotes freedom and efficiency.

Yes, there exists the power that corporations have to abuse workers. This is why I support syndicalism- the application of communism at the business level- and class collaboration.

[Sociobiology]

second thread on definitions of capitalism and such if anyone wants to weigh in.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=81261

[The Merchant Republics]

It means that it's a mainly Capitalist nation; a mixed economy would be an economy with a near even mix of both Socialism and Capitalism, not an economy with traces of one economic system and a predominance of the opposite economic system.

40 percent of the American GDP is in the state sector. States and municipalities employ hundreds of thousands of people, whose primary job is to plan zoning, public infrastructure, and tax policy to best attract business to that locality.

Even if we were to accept your ahistorical definition of capitalism as an economy with private ownership and a free market system, then how is the US, or any other successful Western nation a "mostly capitalist economy". Because from where I'm standing, that looks like a planned economy to me.

Then taking your point to a logical conclusion, you would accept that since a great deal of that government growth and rise of government planning occurred after 1970, when the OP believes Capitalism started failing, I must say I'm seeing a correlation.

[The Scandinvans]

Living with a bunch of other humans with no government conflict resolution, no guaranteed common form of exchange, little to no possibility of the adoption of large-scale projects...?

The problems with e.g. the Sovietunion are easily fixed, the key issues was:
-Corruption
-Idolizing of leaders
-Abuse of power
-Lack of incentives at the individual worker level.

The problems with capitalism are not that easy to fix.

Free market capitalism provides incentives to workers on an individual level, corrupt officials would eventually ruin a company into the ground, they would not have the ability to physically coerce people, and few individuals within a capitalistic economy have ever created a vast cult of personality.

[Sociobiology]

The problems with e.g. the Sovietunion are easily fixed, the key issues was:
-Corruption
-Idolizing of leaders
-Abuse of power
-Lack of incentives at the individual worker level.

The problems with capitalism are not that easy to fix.

Free market capitalism provides incentives to workers on an individual level, corrupt officials would eventually ruin a company into the ground, they would not have the ability to physically coerce people, and few individuals within a capitalistic economy have ever created a vast cult of personality.

1. lack of incentive is built in to communism if you add incentive it becomes socialism.

2. capitalism provides no disincentive to abuse replaceable workers or to combat the Tragedy of the commons systems that do are no longer capitalism.

[The Scandinvans]

Free market capitalism provides incentives to workers on an individual level, corrupt officials would eventually ruin a company into the ground, they would not have the ability to physically coerce people, and few individuals within a capitalistic economy have ever created a vast cult of personality.

1. lack of incentive is built in to communism if you add incentive it becomes socialism.

2. capitalism provides no disincentive to abuse replaceable workers or to combat the Tragedy of the commons systems that do are no longer capitalism.

Yep! Step 3 is reached very quickly due it, so PROFIT!!!!

[Meryuma]

Okay, let's try process of elimination:

Fascism- For the FATHERLAND!!!
Communism- It good on paper, sucks in practice.
Monarchy- It works, until it doesn't.
Feudalism- I don't even need to say anything.

Democracy- It's the worst form of government, unless you count all the others.

Anarchy is a thing...

[The Merchant Republics]

Free market capitalism provides incentives to workers on an individual level, corrupt officials would eventually ruin a company into the ground, they would not have the ability to physically coerce people, and few individuals within a capitalistic economy have ever created a vast cult of personality.

1. lack of incentive is built in to communism if you add incentive it becomes socialism.

2. capitalism provides no disincentive to abuse replaceable workers or to combat the Tragedy of the commons systems that do are no longer capitalism.

1. Such is why communism is so abhorrent, sacrifice as the only means of man to participate with the world, the most abominable thing is not that it wants you to lay on the altar of sacrifice, but that it wants you to do so willingly and happily. Give me greed any day over the imposition of such pure altruism.

2. Capitalism also provides no incentive for replaceable workers to tolerate abuse, and the obvious Capitalist solution to the Tragedy of the Commons is the elimination of the commons. As the solution has been with every case, common buffalo were hunted to near extinction, owned buffalo thrive.

[Hellestia]

Okay, let's try process of elimination:

Fascism- For the FATHERLAND!!!
Communism- It good on paper, sucks in practice.
Monarchy- It works, until it doesn't.
Feudalism- I don't even need to say anything.

Democracy- It's the worst form of government, unless you count all the others.

Anarchy is a thing...

But anarchy is not a form of government. Won't fit the category.

[Sociobiology]

1. lack of incentive is built in to communism if you add incentive it becomes socialism.

2. capitalism provides no disincentive to abuse replaceable workers or to combat the Tragedy of the commons systems that do are no longer capitalism.

1. Such is why communism is so abhorrent, sacrifice as the only means of man to participate with the world, the most abominable thing is not that it wants you to lay on the altar of sacrifice, but that it wants you to do so willingly and happily. Give me greed any day over the imposition of such pure altruism.

2. Capitalism also provides no incentive for replaceable workers to tolerate abuse, and the obvious Capitalist solution to the Tragedy of the Commons is the elimination of the commons. As the solution has been with every case, common buffalo were hunted to near extinction, owned buffalo thrive.

for a given value of thrive
somethings cannot be owned as a whole such as the ocean, air, water tables ect. you cant just pollute "your" air, you pollute everyones. of course the other problem being in pure capitalism there is nothing to stop me from taking what you have by force or just ignoring your ownership cliams, since even legal restrictions or the right to sue requires government oversight.

[Sungai Pusat]

Okay, let's try process of elimination:

Fascism- For the FATHERLAND!!!
Communism- It good on paper, sucks in practice.
Monarchy- It works, until it doesn't.
Feudalism- I don't even need to say anything.

Democracy- It's the worst form of government, unless you count all the others.

Anarchy is a thing...

And Republic too.