|
turbulentflow
Probably sober



Registered: 12/17/18
Posts: 197
|
Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? 2
#26585353 - 04/08/20 12:55 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I think we all know that one of the greatest debates of our time is the debate over the merits of capitalism. Its proponents point to the rapid progress of human society under its control, and claim it's a system founded on individual liberty and mutual benefit. Its detractors, however, say that it's a system that primarily serves the elites, and argue that the degree of systemic control afforded to the rich means they're permitted to continually consolidate power at the expense of the working class.
With the rise in automation and the transition of first world economies towards service and away from material production, this question is more important than ever. Will the fruits of mankind's technological advancements continually be hoarded by a class of cyberpunk elites and megacorporations, growing in power to the point where social change is completely impossible, forcing the rest of humanity to serve them forever? Will the workers unite and overthrow their buergois overlords, installing a glorious robocommunist utopia? Or, will the ongoing need for innovation and entrepreneurship prevent the entrenchment of a capitalist elite, allowing for constant class mobility despite changing times?
To clarify, by "capitalism" I mean the system wherein the economy is controlled semi-democratically through the investment of capital into ventures which provide perpetual revenue to their owners proportional to the capital they invest, not to the amount of labor they provide.
-------------------- "We cannot command nature except by obeying her."
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: turbulentflow]
#26585578 - 04/08/20 05:31 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I don't think it matters, and I reject the premise that capitalism is what gave us a bunch of good things. Same with communism.
People love to talk about how great capitalism is, but why is it that capitalism was only great after WWII? Was it maybe because of strong worker protections? Labor unions? The fact that literally every other industrial area on the planet just got bombed back to the stone age? I think it's mainly the last one.
We also routinely ignore the fact that humans have literally always progressed, until the current generation. People have, with the exception of millennials, always been able to expect to live better than their parents. The system in charge doesn't matter, the progress will happen no matter what.
People have a very narrow focus on existence. We think about the next 50-70 years, but we don't think about 200 years from now. Things will be about the same.
Humanity, much like everything else, is cyclical. We have a generation that is exploited, then we have a generation that goes to war and kills each other, and we have a generation that rebuilds. Finally, we have a generation that collects the profits at the expense of their fellow man again.
We're in a cycle of exploitation right now. Everyone that is currently working age is getting fucked. Gen X and millennials will spend their lives being exploited, and that's just how it is. Next generation is gonna be a war generation, and they'll kill each other over some ideological bullshit while swapping stories about how they're the real men, while millennials and gen X were whimpering pussies. Then they catch one to the face. Whoever comes after them, and inherits a war torn world, will likely unify against such violence and create a much more egalitarian society. And four generations from now, the people will once again value their "rugged individualism", and another generation will step up to get fucked in the ass their entire lives.
And so the cycle continues.
Edited by Kryptos (04/08/20 08:42 AM)
|
living_failure
unworthy



Registered: 06/13/19
Posts: 352
Loc: spain, madrid
Last seen: 3 years, 8 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos]
#26586138 - 04/08/20 11:05 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: I don't think it matters, and I reject the premise that capitalism is what gave us a bunch of good things. Same with communism.
People love to talk about how great capitalism is, but why is it that capitalism was only great after WWII? Was it maybe because of strong worker protections? Labor unions? The fact that literally every other industrial area on the planet just got bombed back to the stone age? I think it's mainly the last one.
We also routinely ignore the fact that humans have literally always progressed, until the current generation. People have, with the exception of millennials, always been able to expect to live better than their parents. The system in charge doesn't matter, the progress will happen no matter what.
People have a very narrow focus on existence. We think about the next 50-70 years, but we don't think about 200 years from now. Things will be about the same.
Humanity, much like everything else, is cyclical. We have a generation that is exploited, then we have a generation that goes to war and kills each other, and we have a generation that rebuilds. Finally, we have a generation that collects the profits at the expense of their fellow man again.
We're in a cycle of exploitation right now. Everyone that is currently working age is getting fucked. Gen X and millennials will spend their lives being exploited, and that's just how it is. Next generation is gonna be a war generation, and they'll kill each other over some ideological bullshit while swapping stories about how they're the real men, while millennials and gen X were whimpering pussies. Then they catch one to the face. Whoever comes after them, and inherits a war torn world, will likely unify against such violence and create a much more egalitarian society. And four generations from now, the people will once again value their "rugged individualism", and another generation will step up to get fucked in the ass their entire lives.
And so the cycle continues.
Since America invented the nuclear weapons we can no longer have big scale wars. Well, we can, but the damage will be at the level of planetary catastrophe.
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: living_failure]
#26586194 - 04/08/20 11:40 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
We're gonna have a nuclear war, or at least a nuclear attack, and it will happen within our lifetimes (assuming you're under 40 and reasonably healthy). If I was a betting man, I'd actually put it in the near future. Mid 20s, early 2030s. Probably a few years after the current economic depression ends.
Machine guns gave us the War to end all Wars, and we would never again allow for that sort of mass slaughter to occur. Until WWII, 30 years later.
Nuclear weapons will be used, for the same reason that machine guns were used again and again. They are effective. The only thing that stopped us before was (a) lack of good targets and (b) living memory of the fearsome destruction caused by even a relatively low yield nuke.
(a) I expect that a war will break out between the US and China in the near future as China continues to pull ahead worldwide, and the US will rely on our best diplomatic tools: the Marines. This will give us a good juicy target.
(b) of the people that know the destruction caused by nuclear weapons, there are maybe a dozen still alive. Everything else is second or thirdhand knowledge. At some point, somebody is gonna wanna see it for themselves. Sorta like how trumpy dropped a MOAB just to be able to say he dropped the biggest bomb.
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 5 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos]
#26586220 - 04/08/20 11:56 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I don't think we can win a war with China without destroying the earth. I also question whether either country can afford to sever it's economic ties with the other. I think we will just go on fighting proxy wars.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Brian Jones]
#26586229 - 04/08/20 12:02 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
It's an unstable equilibrium.
We've been at equilibrium for a while, but China is now starting to pull ahead. At the same time, the US is falling behind. At a certain point (accelerated by trade disruptions, since it decouples the economies), it will be a net benefit to cease economic ties for one side, which will significantly hurt the other side.
The mindset of American exceptionalism means that Americans will likely react violently when confronted by the fact that they've lost to China, and a a leader like diaper donnie would 100% rather end all life on Earth than accept defeat graciously.
|
Frank Zappotecorum
Smooth-Brained Mycophagist



Registered: 01/01/17
Posts: 138
Loc: Scamdinavia
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos]
#26586285 - 04/08/20 12:41 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I'm gonna go with no.
If we define capitalism as the ownership of and authority over business by financial investors rather than the workers, then what incentive do investors have to keep on labor when automation comes in? Machines don't strike, ask for medical leave without penalty of being fired, or better healthcare options. Besides the "Goodwill of Man" argument (which I don't think holds much merit) I don't think there is any real incentive. Therefore it stands that when automation comes in-> workers go out -> wealth and power becomes more stratified ->we pave a smooth path for brutal neo-feudalism or a fascist regime (and yes, I mean a fascist regime where the rule of an elite class is upheld at the expense of an underclass's lives/freedom, save necessary labor.
-------------------- What are all these leaves doing in my mouth? I ain't got a lot but peep my Trade list
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
|
Using your definition, the US is already a fascist regime.
|
Frank Zappotecorum
Smooth-Brained Mycophagist



Registered: 01/01/17
Posts: 138
Loc: Scamdinavia
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26586444 - 04/08/20 01:49 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah good point Kryptos.
-------------------- What are all these leaves doing in my mouth? I ain't got a lot but peep my Trade list
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 22 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: turbulentflow] 1
#26586531 - 04/08/20 02:23 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The age of automation happened well before modern regulated capitalism became a thing.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Frank Zappotecorum
Smooth-Brained Mycophagist



Registered: 01/01/17
Posts: 138
Loc: Scamdinavia
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: christopera]
#26586609 - 04/08/20 02:57 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I don't think the age of automation stopped, also what do you mean by modern regulated capitalism? To be clear I do think there are better protections for workers than in the industrial revolution (there were better protections for the environment too before our idiot-in-chief and his cronies suspended them)
-------------------- What are all these leaves doing in my mouth? I ain't got a lot but peep my Trade list
|
turbulentflow
Probably sober



Registered: 12/17/18
Posts: 197
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26586981 - 04/08/20 06:15 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: I don't think it matters, and I reject the premise that capitalism is what gave us a bunch of good things. Same with communism.
People love to talk about how great capitalism is, but why is it that capitalism was only great after WWII? Was it maybe because of strong worker protections? Labor unions? The fact that literally every other industrial area on the planet just got bombed back to the stone age? I think it's mainly the last one.
We also routinely ignore the fact that humans have literally always progressed, until the current generation. People have, with the exception of millennials, always been able to expect to live better than their parents. The system in charge doesn't matter, the progress will happen no matter what.
Totally agree. I tried to be neutral in my original post, but I think it's rather silly to credit capitalism for industrialization. Socialist countries were able to industrialize just as easily as capitalist ones, and I 100% agree that the main reason the US was so successful was that they were the only country to come out of WWII without being bombed to shit.
Quote:
Kryptos said: People have a very narrow focus on existence. We think about the next 50-70 years, but we don't think about 200 years from now. Things will be about the same.
Humanity, much like everything else, is cyclical. We have a generation that is exploited, then we have a generation that goes to war and kills each other, and we have a generation that rebuilds. Finally, we have a generation that collects the profits at the expense of their fellow man again.
We're in a cycle of exploitation right now. Everyone that is currently working age is getting fucked. Gen X and millennials will spend their lives being exploited, and that's just how it is. Next generation is gonna be a war generation, and they'll kill each other over some ideological bullshit while swapping stories about how they're the real men, while millennials and gen X were whimpering pussies. Then they catch one to the face. Whoever comes after them, and inherits a war torn world, will likely unify against such violence and create a much more egalitarian society. And four generations from now, the people will once again value their "rugged individualism", and another generation will step up to get fucked in the ass their entire lives.
And so the cycle continues.
Well, I certainly agree that humans will remain human, bringing along with them all the usual baggage that comes along with that, but I'm not sure I agree with your analysis of history as a series of cycles of exploitation, conflict, and regrowth. I think that you can definitely say that the past 200 or so years have followed that pattern pretty well, but I think that's largely a coincidence. I don't think war necessarily causes economic growth, and I don't think economic growth and exploitation are mutually exclusive.
True, war has often been a driving force for technological development, and the genesis of most of the world's largest empires. However, I think the explosion of knowledge and cultural development we saw post-WWII had more to do with the fact that WWII occurred smack dab in the middle of the industrial revolution. Sure, the war doubtlessly had a massive impact on shaping the societies that formed but I don't think it was at all necessary for the subsequent period of massive growth. Maybe it was necessary in order for the US to so starkly overtake Britain as a world power, but I think human progress would have marched on either way. I mean look at the pre-war period, which was also an era of unprecedented economic and technological development. It seems to me like the war was more an interruption to ongoing development than anything else.
Now, granted, the pre-war period was also a period of massive exploitation, but I'd argue that this exploitation was largely as a result of the massive growth happening at the time, and not, as you postulate, due to a sort of stagnation occurring as a result of previous economic success. Technology drastically changed the methods of production, and for the first time in recent history, we reached a point of societal complexity where agrarian self-subsistence was no longer truly an option for most people, opening the doors to much more severe and systemic forms of exploitation that required the creation of new workers rights movements to combat.
That's a big part of why I asked the question of capitalism in the age of automation in the first place. I think that the rate of technological progress has absolutely exploded in the past few centuries, while our cultural progress has somewhat struggled to keep up. That's also why I'm not a Marxist, for the record, I think Marxist dialectics have already become outdated due to technological development (Engels himself was quoted towards the end of his life as saying he believed technological developments had made the type of revolution he and Marx dreamed of unfeasible, though he was referring more to military technology than the technology of production as I am). But technology has rapidly changed how we produce goods (and, even what those goods are!) and with these massive changes comes a massive potential for exploitation, a potential I personally believe our society is unequipped to handle.
As for how to better structure our society, I must confess I'm rather at a loss...
-------------------- "We cannot command nature except by obeying her."
|
Yellow Pants



Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: turbulentflow] 1
#26587280 - 04/08/20 08:33 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Anarcho-socialism man. 
You shed the detached owning class and the absurdity of the state.
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 22 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#26587447 - 04/08/20 09:35 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Every single time one of these threads pops up the obvious reality is that OP has no fucking clue how long things have been automated. None.
America (the United States not the continent) would not be what it is today without automation. Well, automation and slavery, but a large part of the industrialized world held slaves at the same time... so... The rest of the world getting bombed out of existence (as Kryptos mentions) is the second reason capitalism marched on, albeit in a regulated fashion (thanks socialism).
I program machines daily. The very machines I program run on the same fucking code that was invented in the 50's at MIT, that very same code base machines parts for rockets, satellites, toaster ovens, you name it. It 3d prints, it runs regular printers, and at its core it's so painfully simple a cat could learn it. If you think there are great advances in automation in these areas you are full of shit. Nothing has changed in 40 years except for the type of jobs surrounding these fields. Those who can program make more than ever, the rest fall behind. But this isn't an automation problem, it's an education problem. Machine programmers are in demand, and instead of trying to be machines, humans could be telling machines what to do. It works much better that way.
For the record, machine automated machines have existed since the late 1800's. The first computer numerical controlled machine was built in 1952. The microprocessor has helped, but machine automated machines have no processor, and many of them continue to run 24/7 today.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
Edited by christopera (04/08/20 09:53 PM)
|
turbulentflow
Probably sober



Registered: 12/17/18
Posts: 197
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: christopera] 1
#26587568 - 04/08/20 10:27 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I don't think you realize how short a century really is when we're talking about cultural development. There are registered voters alive today who are old enough remember the invention of the first CNC. Also, with advances in machine learning and artificial intelligence, it seems quite possible that machines will soon be able to program themselves. I also have programming experience, including experience with machine learning specifically, so I'm intimately aware that the human element is still crucial. However, I think you're far too quick to discount the unique situation we find ourselves in with respect to automation.
Yes, automation has been a pressing issue since the dawn of the industrial revolution, but we're reaching a level of technological achievement such that we may no longer require human labor to sustain the material necessities of life. And I think it's certainly worth asking what will happen to humanity after that point.
-------------------- "We cannot command nature except by obeying her."
|
turbulentflow
Probably sober



Registered: 12/17/18
Posts: 197
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#26587572 - 04/08/20 10:31 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yellow Pants said: Anarcho-socialism man. 
You shed the detached owning class and the absurdity of the state.
How would that work? I'll admit I haven't really had the chance to read any anarchist theory, but it seems to me that given the intricate and interconnected nature of our modern economy, a functional socialist economy would require quite an extensive bureaucracy, which seems rather contradictory to the notion of anarchy.
-------------------- "We cannot command nature except by obeying her."
|
Yellow Pants



Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: turbulentflow]
#26588632 - 04/09/20 11:20 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
turbulentflow said:
Quote:
Yellow Pants said: Anarcho-socialism man. 
You shed the detached owning class and the absurdity of the state.
How would that work? I'll admit I haven't really had the chance to read any anarchist theory, but it seems to me that given the intricate and interconnected nature of our modern economy, a functional socialist economy would require quite an extensive bureaucracy, which seems rather contradictory to the notion of anarchy.
Tbh, idk. Nevertheless I would think the intricate and growing interconnected nature of the economy would make an excessive and extensive bureaucracy less and less relevant. Maybe that’s just optimism.
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: turbulentflow]
#26589203 - 04/09/20 04:23 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
turbulentflow said: Well, I certainly agree that humans will remain human, bringing along with them all the usual baggage that comes along with that, but I'm not sure I agree with your analysis of history as a series of cycles of exploitation, conflict, and regrowth. I think that you can definitely say that the past 200 or so years have followed that pattern pretty well, but I think that's largely a coincidence. I don't think war necessarily causes economic growth, and I don't think economic growth and exploitation are mutually exclusive.
True, war has often been a driving force for technological development, and the genesis of most of the world's largest empires. However, I think the explosion of knowledge and cultural development we saw post-WWII had more to do with the fact that WWII occurred smack dab in the middle of the industrial revolution. Sure, the war doubtlessly had a massive impact on shaping the societies that formed but I don't think it was at all necessary for the subsequent period of massive growth. Maybe it was necessary in order for the US to so starkly overtake Britain as a world power, but I think human progress would have marched on either way. I mean look at the pre-war period, which was also an era of unprecedented economic and technological development. It seems to me like the war was more an interruption to ongoing development than anything else.
Now, granted, the pre-war period was also a period of massive exploitation, but I'd argue that this exploitation was largely as a result of the massive growth happening at the time, and not, as you postulate, due to a sort of stagnation occurring as a result of previous economic success. Technology drastically changed the methods of production, and for the first time in recent history, we reached a point of societal complexity where agrarian self-subsistence was no longer truly an option for most people, opening the doors to much more severe and systemic forms of exploitation that required the creation of new workers rights movements to combat.
That's a big part of why I asked the question of capitalism in the age of automation in the first place. I think that the rate of technological progress has absolutely exploded in the past few centuries, while our cultural progress has somewhat struggled to keep up. That's also why I'm not a Marxist, for the record, I think Marxist dialectics have already become outdated due to technological development (Engels himself was quoted towards the end of his life as saying he believed technological developments had made the type of revolution he and Marx dreamed of unfeasible, though he was referring more to military technology than the technology of production as I am). But technology has rapidly changed how we produce goods (and, even what those goods are!) and with these massive changes comes a massive potential for exploitation, a potential I personally believe our society is unequipped to handle.
As for how to better structure our society, I must confess I'm rather at a loss...
War necessarily gives economic growth to one group at the direct expense of another group. Used to be, you stabbed someone and stole their shit. Now, you sell a guy a sword and tell them to stab someone.
Technology develops largely independently, because there are only so many people effectively capable of advancing technology at any given time. The amount of funding/societal support matters, but those people are largely like pilots: they don't give a fuck about the money, they just want to fly a plane.
Exploitation is like cancer on an economy. It's caused by a failure of normal regulatory processes, it pops up anywhere in hundreds of different forms, and each one has to be treated differently. Further, the only effective treatment is to cut it out. Sometimes, that's not possible without killing the patient, and that's how you get the Philippines.
These are all individual forces of human life. They intersect, they interact, but they all stand alone. None causes the other, they are all members of the same pantheon.
War lives in a cycle of human lifespan: it sounds great on paper, it's the hell on earth in real life, and it takes a generation to forget.
Technology will always march forward, though it speeds up sometimes.
Exploitation pops up and claims the weakest link.
As far as structuring society, well, Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice. Pull down your pants, and slide on the ice.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,362
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 9 hours, 35 minutes
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos] 2
#26590224 - 04/10/20 05:17 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Capitalism is an economic system in which the vast majority of people sell their labor in order to afford goods and services.
The “age of automation” implies that a plurality of these people would no longer be able to sell their labor, and as such would not be able to afford goods and services.
OP thinks this is ideal?
--------------------
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: The Ecstatic]
#26590256 - 04/10/20 06:03 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Every economic system people sell their labor.
Capitalism has just figured out a way to make regular people try to fuck each other over in the process.
Hell, just look at the 5g conspiracies. There are people that are happily fucking up internet infrastructure because YouTube told them to. Comcast is probably jizzing themselves thinking about how much money they can save by leaving in place some of the worst internet in the world.
|
Qave
Stranger
Registered: 03/04/20
Posts: 56
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos]
#26593555 - 04/11/20 01:41 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: I don't think it matters, and I reject the premise that capitalism is what gave us a bunch of good things.
That's a position that you're going to have to back up, buddy. Capitalism gave us a bunch of good things the same way the steam engine gave us good things. Just because it's not the be-all solution to every problem, and possibly outdated, doesn't mean it didn't accomplish a lot. The Wealth of Nations was basically Adam Smith trying to figure out how humanity revolutionized the textile industry from a thousand years of roughspun tunics to almost everyone being able to afford multiple well-made garments in a generation. Capitalism is a tool, like dynamite, and just like dynamite it's great at doing one thing but makes a big mess if you jam it into a school.
Quote:
Kryptos said:People love to talk about how great capitalism is, but why is it that capitalism was only great after WWII?
Capitalism did great things before WWII. As I pointed out with Adam Smith above, the single greatest real expansion of wealth probably happened in the 18th and 19th centuries, when major innovations in mechanization, metallurgy, travel, and communication made modern life unrecognizable compared to the slight changes made over three millennia since Egypt. And it's not like the capability to make these advances didn't exist beforehand. The Roman economy had banks, loans, trade, intricate tax systems, social programs, concrete. They even invented the first steam engine about two thousand years ago. Yet over that entire time they barely managed to invent pants. Why? Because the Roman economy measured wealth in land and slaves to work that land. If a patrician wanted to increase the productivity of his land, he just got more slaves. And if you want more land, you raise an army and grab it from someone else, or buy it out from under your neighbor after he goes bankrupt from being in the army for ten years and not being able to work his land.
The US economic boom post-WWII to capitalism isn't that capitalism suddenly started working when it hadn't ever worked before, it's that society had changed. The Americas were fresh with land and natural resources, had economies untouched by either world war, and the entire planet was in need of consumer goods to replace everything they had lost with a global distribution system completely capable of shipping those goods from the US to everywhere else on the planet. The USA arguably became the world's first ever hyperpower. The amount of real wealth produced in those few decades was staggering, and with that amount of wealth and leisure time people finally had the ability to advocate for themselves, join unions, and benefit from that wealth (strangely mirroring predictions by a weirdo German guy a hundred years prior...).
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Qave]
#26593586 - 04/11/20 01:55 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Qave said: The US economic boom post-WWII to capitalism isn't that capitalism suddenly started working when it hadn't ever worked before, it's that society had changed. The Americas were fresh with land and natural resources, had economies untouched by either world war, and the entire planet was in need of consumer goods to replace everything they had lost with a global distribution system completely capable of shipping those goods from the US to everywhere else on the planet.
This is my point. Literally any economic system would have succeeded, because the US had the recipe for success coming out of WWII. We could have been socialist, capitalist, corporatist, or fuckin' druids.
Capitalism had nothing to do with it.
And your history lesson proves the same. Capitalism isn't what brings good things, having the right combinations of land, resources, and population brings good things. Capitalism just happens to be the economic system du jour.
|
Qave
Stranger
Registered: 03/04/20
Posts: 56
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos]
#26593714 - 04/11/20 03:15 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kryptos said: And your history lesson proves the same. Capitalism isn't what brings good things, having the right combinations of land, resources, and population brings good things. Capitalism just happens to be the economic system du jour.
My history lesson showed exactly the opposite of that. The Romans had the right combination of land, resources, and population for two thousand years and the greatest technological innovation of their age was roads. And it's not for lack of ingenuity. At the beginning of the first Punic war Rome was almost entirely land-based, with a few dinky ships that could only sail along the coast, while Carthage was the greatest naval power in the Mediterranean. But then they got so fucking angry at Carthage that they went from zero navy to all the navy, crossed the Mediterranean, and stomped Carthage into the ground. After that, charged by their newfound technical prowess they... conquered Egypt and used their new Navy to protect their grain barges.
Similarly, China was one of the largest empires on the planet for most of recorded history. We know this because a big chunk of that recorded history was written and stored in China. They, too, had the land, resources, and population to do great things. We know this because they invented gunpowder a thousand years ago. But then they... used it to make fireworks. 200 years later they were invaded by the Mongols. Having been shown the folly of a weak military, China... still just used gunpowder for fireworks for another 500 years.
The Opium Wars occurred because the British sailed in and said "We are desperate for silk, tea, and porcelain, we will give you the industrial revolution and leapfrog your technology 500 years, just please give us silk. I'm wearing fucking wool undies, here, I'm desperate." and the Chinese nobility said "the fuck we want with your 'industrial revolution'? We own China. lol guess we can take your silver, tho". One empty silver vault later and the Dutch East India Company becomes a state-sponsored drug dealer just to feed consumer demand for silk, tea, and teacups back home. One utterly, utterly, embarrassing war later and China ends up paying the DEIC compensation for all the illegal Opium they destroyed, ceding Hong Kong to England in perpetuity, and opening six trade ports.
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Qave]
#26593817 - 04/11/20 04:30 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Rome was a largely capitalist society, as was China.
Both empires collapsed for the same reason the US is currently falling apart: regulatory capture. Individuals became more powerful than the state, and the state collapsed under the strain.
|
Yellow Pants



Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26595305 - 04/12/20 09:07 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Maybe someone can explain this to me. Since the capitalist only cares about their bottom line and is evidently willing to do anything to maximize their profit including the seduction of a whoring state, outsourcing etc. then would a worker co-op not solve both the problem of a corrupt and wasteful state and the elitism of the capitalist? If the workers as a whole co-own the workplace and democratically steer its operations and distributions then wouldn’t this drastically reduce a lot of the inequality and outsourcing issues? The regulatory functions of the state would be needed less and less.
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Yellow Pants] 1
#26595802 - 04/12/20 01:27 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
What you're basically describing is a union, though I think there's nothing wrong with a full co-op in which workers share in the profits of their labor. If we take your idea to the full extreme we end up in the middle of a proletariat revolution.
Unions need the protection of the state to develop. Right now, in many places if you say the word "union" you're fired immediately, and there's always someone to replace you. The collapse of the unions was allowed to occur by the workers that relied on them through the popularization of corrupt examples (teamsters), as well as the idea that people shouldn't have to "pay to work" as unions are usually funded through a portion of the worker's paycheck (a paycheck which is severely increased by the bargaining power of the union, but people rarely think two steps ahead).
Without protections, and even with robust unions, there is nothing stopping a company from hiring scabs. One of my first job applications out of college was a temporary position as a scab. I would have gotten paid nearly 60$ an hour, as well as having a fully paid hotel room, for a few weeks. The next best was offering me 16$ an hour, and I had loans to pay. Sadly, I didn't get the job. Strike ended too quickly.
The system is currently set up where the workers are fighting each other, while the owners collect the profits. This is not conducive to unions, because workers need to work together for a union to form.
An especially ironic example is that some unions are currently against M4A. Why? Because one of the only remaining selling points of joining those unions is medical insurance. A weak union can't do much.
|
Yellow Pants



Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26595977 - 04/12/20 03:09 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I have nothing against unions per se, but I don’t think that’s what I’m getting at. A union is a bargaining collective of employees, or something like that. How about dissolving the distinction between employer/employee literally making the working class and the owning class the same thing. Idk if “worker co-op” is the right term but I think you see what I’m getting at.
This way the workers are the ones democratically steering the operations as opposed to a board of directors appointed by some rich dudes sitting behind computer screens. I’m sure an effective union could make better working conditions but there’s still that exploitative relationship.
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#26595998 - 04/12/20 03:21 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Shit man, welcome to the proletariat revolution then. Let us join together and seize the means of production.
Marx and Lenin should have you covered when it comes to ideology.
|
Yellow Pants



Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos] 1
#26596006 - 04/12/20 03:27 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Alright right on
|
specialpeopleclub


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 5,584
Loc: Mitten
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#26596513 - 04/12/20 07:33 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The question itself is idiotic. There isnt another viable option.
--------------------
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: turbulentflow]
#26599830 - 04/14/20 08:43 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The straight answer would be no. Capitalism has, in fact, served Humanity objectives to a point. The real problem is how big can it grow and how far can it go into the economy without becoming detrimental to that economy. The issue here it's the scale of it and how you can adjust the system as it grows. Globalization exposed several fragilities of this system. I can enumerate a few like the role of global finance and its absurdities, the creation of worldwide monopolies or the heavy and continuous devaluation of currency, much exacerbated by demographic growth and redistribution of wealth.
Now, on the other side of the scale coin. I really don't think the "small" capitalism, based on trading goods for capital is "bad". In fact, as anarcho-collectivist I do believe in mutualism and in the existence of labor credits which is very similar to a currency based society. Nevertheless, such society would envision a planed economy, at least on a macro level, that would exist to take care of human needs. Something contrary to the capitalist free market which exists to acquire profit. "Human needs" is something capitalism wasn't created for. That's why you can have a surplus of toilets made of gold and, at the same, lack of essential goods for the population. A simple example in our now everyday reality: where are the masks when you need them if there's plenty money to buy them ? They should arrive ... somehow ... and mostly when the harm - of not having those in time - is already done.
Wrapping it up: Global capitalism is a non-rational system when it comes to managing resources on a global level. In fact, it exploits them just for the sake of profit in a very linear way. For such exploitation, and consequent profit, it needs the binomial consumer/worker unit to exist. That's why there's the exaltation of the labor market and the intrinsic resistance to automated production units to evolve, multiply and assume a decisive role in our future. People are afraid to loose their jobs to the machines but the machines are supposed to liberate us from work. How can you solve this contradiction ? Should we keep a labor market and forget about automation, keeping us eternally where we are. Or should we have the courage to change the system and embrace technology as a decisive factor of evolution ?
There are some theories about the subject but sure and firstly, an open mind is needed to accept the contradictions of the current system. I try to imagine a heavily automatized first and second sectors of economy. This would free humans to contribute, mostly, in the third sector. Which, by its intellectual oriented nature would funnel human activity to create new processes and technology to be applied in the first and second sectors. In the process, many professions would tend to disappear but new ones would be available. As it has always been. The idea is to have production units - what we call now companies, enterprises - that can assure the basics for the population - food, shelter and health - through the means of automation to, consequently, empower the people and thus project Human abilities and ingenuity into our reality.
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
Edited by MAIA (04/14/20 08:49 AM)
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: The question itself is idiotic. There isnt another viable option.
Your answer is idiotic. Sounds like XIII century John Doe speaking about feudalism. If there wasn't viable options for any actual system, historically, we shouldn't be here. Economical systems superseded each other and that's the real viable option. No system can stagnate for an indeterminate amount of time without dooming itself to destruction. Either evolves or revolves to something else the same way reality is intrinsically mutable and emergent.
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 34 minutes, 21 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: MAIA]
#26600011 - 04/14/20 10:06 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Great posts.....awesome response about capitalism and econ in general. I wonder if the production units(focused on human needs)could coexist alongside a capitalist system.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
Edited by SirTripAlot (04/14/20 10:07 AM)
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#26600161 - 04/14/20 11:04 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Great posts.....awesome response about capitalism and econ in general. I wonder if the production units(focused on human needs)could coexist alongside a capitalist system.
If there are private companies overlapping the same products or services of those production units (communally owned with centralized management), there would be competition and it would be harder for capitalist companies to compete but alas, that's the same with all natural and many created monopolies in the capitalist system. As long as the products and services created by private companies have an added value, they will be acquired. So I see no problem. In fact, regarding the reality I portrayed, I believe this scenario should be encouraged in the tertiary sector. I mean, if you can manage to obviate all the 3 basic needs - food, shelter and health - you would only need to work for the rest, which is still much for someone to have a comfortable life. So, there's incentive to be a part of the productive structure and contribute. That would be the point when the "labor market" starts making no sense and you start becoming a collaborator with deserved credits. That would free workers to choose how they contribute.
But for this to happen, currency or credits or whatever you use to trade should be backed up by something. One transitory way to achieve this would be creating a dual currency system where production units products and services would be valued by the added value they bring to society instead of just supply and demand.
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
Edited by MAIA (04/14/20 11:11 AM)
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 34 minutes, 21 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: MAIA]
#26600259 - 04/14/20 11:47 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Starting to get past my paygrade, but if these (public) production units faced competition from traditional corporations, the disparity and rift would manifest in some way. Maybe there could be different regulatory capacities for things on the macro/ microeconomic level.....the learning curve would be brutal.
Or are you suggesting that these production units are exclusive for certain goods and services?
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,263
Last seen: 25 minutes, 37 seconds
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#26600297 - 04/14/20 12:03 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Sounds a bit like my people box idea...
|
Yellow Pants



Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Kryptos]
#26600589 - 04/14/20 01:47 PM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
MAIA said:
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Great posts.....awesome response about capitalism and econ in general. I wonder if the production units(focused on human needs)could coexist alongside a capitalist system.
If there are private companies overlapping the same products or services of those production units (communally owned with centralized management), there would be competition and it would be harder for capitalist companies to compete but alas, that's the same with all natural and many created monopolies in the capitalist system. As long as the products and services created by private companies have an added value, they will be acquired. So I see no problem.
Under a worker controlled enterprise there would be a central tenant that control of the enterprise would rest solely with the workers democratically which would include the operation and distributions of its surplus. What incentive would there be for an investor or whoever to purchase the enterprise if he receives no control or any part of the surplus? Can you even have ownership without being a part of the workforce in a given enterprise?
|
specialpeopleclub


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 5,584
Loc: Mitten
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#26601977 - 04/15/20 02:40 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Capitalism is about individuals managing a their resources. A centralized economy doesnt grow. China tried that, then capitulated in certain areas like Macao, Hong Kong, Tianjin, Shenzhen, Shanghai. It still isnt enough,which. China is in among the woest economic positions. I dobt see any real third prong in politics. There are communists on the left, and at worst anarchists on the right. Alot of leftist seem to think themselves anarchists, but you dont go left and somehownhit freedom. You didn't go toward freedom and somehow hit totalitarianism.
--------------------
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#26602076 - 04/15/20 04:33 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: Or are you suggesting that these production units are exclusive for certain goods and services?
Yes, only for certain goods and services. Mainly those which purpose is to attain universal production of food, shelter and health. It might be possible to extend to other sectors depending on the population needs. Keyword is "need" as opposed to "profit". Profit might be many things. One of them is being a byproduct of the production process when goods are acquired. Capitalism sees it as the alpha and omega but it deems the whole economy to become an irrational and unsustainable system. As it is now. Even more when it comes to the well-being of the population as a whole. If you remove profit from the equation in the products and goods destined to supply the 3 basic needs, then the resources and the productive process could be managed much more rationally, increasing sustainability.
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
|
MadMuncher
destroy weyerhauser



Registered: 10/27/12
Posts: 8,404
Loc: not in compliance
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: MAIA] 1
#26602091 - 04/15/20 04:54 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
amanita phalloides prints for trade $BanEnlil $IgnoreEnlil Spicemaster said: The stories. The words. The descriptions. Keep your list handy. 1234Go said: I bet you guys PM about me... Ban Lotto Wins: IIIII
|
specialpeopleclub


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 5,584
Loc: Mitten
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: MAIA]
#26602099 - 04/15/20 05:02 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
The population isnt important. We live as individuals. How do you decide 'need'? Who is going to do societal jobs?

Communism, reclaming land since 1960
--------------------
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#26602112 - 04/15/20 05:21 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Yellow Pants said: What incentive would there be for an investor or whoever to purchase the enterprise if he receives no control or any part of the surplus?
I made a distinction between collectively controlled production units (ccpu) and private ventures. The ccpu's investment comes from the mutualization of both gains and losses. It's backed up by the effort of the whole to attain the maximum level of satisfaction regarding their basic needs. That's ccpu's alpha and omega. One other thing is the existence of private initiative and ventures. Of course this begs many other questions along the process. Mostly regarding accumulation of capital/credits and property rights. There are some anarchist theories which offer some clues. I would say that the idea of a single investor, patron or enterprise would be replaced by the idea of collective investors instead (a true democratization of private initiative). And when you say "investment", it isn't always money what you need to invest to make things happen. As long as you have access to resources and technology, you mostly need knowledge, ingenuity and a collective sense of mission. Remember, you would be living in a society where all basic needs are taken care of.
Quote:
Yellow Pants said: Can you even have ownership without being a part of the workforce in a given enterprise?
Not in private ventures but yes for ccpu's. They would be managed by their workers but belonging to everyone.
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: There are communists on the left, and at worst anarchists on the right. Alot of leftist seem to think themselves anarchists, but you dont go left and somehownhit freedom. You didn't go toward freedom and somehow hit totalitarianism.
That's definitely not a true definition of anarchism as a whole. You got it all wrong. So, you deny the existence of anarcho-socialism, which include, anarcho-collectivist, anarcho-communists, anarcho-syndicalists and mutualists ? Really ?!
So, anarchism for you is this extreme idea of individualism where you can do whatever the fuck you want ? That's what you call "freedom" ? The one without any responsibility nor applied knowledge ?
I just know a couple of such anarchist flavors: anarcho-individualists and anarcho-capitalist. The former are mostly egocentric libertarians. I don't blame them as I used to be one of them until I realized I don't want to live in a fucking cave, alone, for the rest of my life. The later barely make it as something anarchist. The basic anarchist theory rejects 3 types of authority: religious, political and ECONOMIC. Money, capital is a form of authority in itself. Thus how much sense it makes to be an anarcho-capitalist ? Beats me...
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
|
specialpeopleclub


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 5,584
Loc: Mitten
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: MAIA]
#26602145 - 04/15/20 05:54 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Those ideas are all rediculous. Stop listening to ramshackle glory so much. Its good music, but Pat probably isnt the best person to emulate
--------------------
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: The population isnt important. We live as individuals.
Sure. Then go live in a cave and tell me for how long your "individual" will last. On the other hand, and needless to say, you are a part of the population. So you are population and individual at the same time. Philosophy 101 or is it philosophy too "communist" for you ?
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: How do you decide 'need'?
You don't decide need. Needs are self-evident. What do you use to take a dump ? And to clean you ass ? I bet your mind has already responded what needs are.
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Who is going to do societal jobs?
Someone that wants more of life than just being at home getting fat. Many, I think. Won't you ? Why not, if society gives you the basics of life ? Surely, there would be some kind of moral regarding some behaviors. As it always has existed.
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said:

Communism, reclaming land since 1960
Ok. But I'm not communist ... I'm a postmodernist with social and political worries reclaiming the best from anarcho-collectivism and mutualism as some of the solutions. Communism is as decrepit as capitalism.
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
Edited by MAIA (04/15/20 06:11 AM)
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Those ideas are all rediculous. Stop listening to ramshackle glory so much. Its good music, but Pat probably isnt the best person to emulate
Do you want me to do the silly dance as well ? :p
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala
 Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
|
specialpeopleclub


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 5,584
Loc: Mitten
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: MAIA]
#26602159 - 04/15/20 06:10 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Living where others live doesnt make you less of an individual. None of whatyou are saying wasnt taken into account when I said that
How are needs 'self evident '? What I see as a need, you may not. I like weed. Its a need to me. I shower. TP is not necesarry. Should be illegal
Tpi cant even respond to that last post. I assume you mean people are going to be motivated by some internal motivation to go and not get paid? Its really something i cant translate
Quote:
Ok. But I'm not communist ... I'm a post-modernist with social and political worries reclaiming the best from anarcho-collectivism and mutualism as some of the solutions. Communism is as decrepit as capitalism.
Thats called being a communist. You can say they are decrepit, but nothing you have is new. no matter how many lables you add to your ideology, it wont be origional. Either individuals make choices, or beurocracues. There isnt a third consciousness to ask when humans show our fallibilityQuote:
MAIA said:
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Those ideas are all rediculous. Stop listening to ramshackle glory so much. Its good music, but Pat probably isnt the best person to emulate
Do you want me to do the silly dance as well ? :p
Of course
Gonna dissapear a while. Dont want to overpost and be up in every conversation
--------------------
Edited by specialpeopleclub (04/15/20 06:13 AM)
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 18 days, 17 hours
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Living where others live doesnt make you less of an individual.
Not less, not more. That's not the issue. The notion of individuality is a product of communal living, of society. Otherwise, if you are alone in a an island such notion wouldn't make any sense because you would be the sole expression of it. It would be meaningless, or only meaningful to yourself. In the end, who would fucking care ?
I realize it can be hard to conceptualize this notion but the expression of the individual only makes any sense if it is experienced by others. It's a shared experience of the self. It comes to mind some classics that make a similar approach. Name the allegory of the cave. Again, philosophy 101.
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: How are needs 'self evident '? What I see as a need, you may not. I like weed. Its a need to me. I shower. TP is not necesarry. Should be illegal
I'm baffled for such profound notion ... 3 basic needs. They are repeated several times in my interventions. Care to read or should I copy&paste them once again ? Want weed ? Plant weed, trade it for
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Tpi cant even respond to that last post. I assume you mean people are going to be motivated by some internal motivation to go and not get paid? Its really something i cant translate
Paid, credited. Yes, of course. Is this a straight answer enough ? Though you could extrapolate such notion from what I wrote. Guess I was wrong ...
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Thats called being a communist. You can say they are decrepit, but nothing you have is new. no matter how many lables you add to your ideology, it wont be origional. Either individuals make choices, or beurocracues. There isnt a third consciousness to ask when humans show our fallibility
Those pesky commies that eat little children at lunch ... choices or beurocracies. The evident choice in the Platonic cave of shadows. Oh, and I'm so fucking worried about originality I can't wait to write a book and earn some green...
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said:
"Do you want me to do the silly dance as well ? :p"
Of course
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Gonna dissapear a while. Dont want to overpost and be up in every conversation
Edited by MAIA (04/15/20 08:55 AM)
|
specialpeopleclub


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 5,584
Loc: Mitten
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: MAIA]
#26602391 - 04/15/20 08:58 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
None of that is the point. The farther from the i dividual and their immediate group, hopefully a family with a mother and father, the less important they are ro the individual. You cant expecr people to empathize non locally
In what market would I buy weed?
Who is making these trades or giving credit? Thats capitalism.
--------------------
|
Frank Zappotecorum
Smooth-Brained Mycophagist



Registered: 01/01/17
Posts: 138
Loc: Scamdinavia
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
|
Capitalism is not about individualism. Capitalism is about people being able to profit off of business without having to work at those businesses (or work period). Also, under capitalism, we have the wonderful benefit of corporate bureaucracies. If you have dealt with the healthcare industry you have dealt with probably one of the most insidious bureaucracies that this modern age has created. In some cases people pay upwards of 10k a year to ward off the fear of going bankrupt from unforeseen malaise. Even so your claim is processed through a network of agents and lawyers to deny, discredit and otherwise fuck you in your hour of need. Also the Aral Sea is a good model for what you get when you get massive ideologically driven pushes to utilize resources unsustainably, but this is not unique to the communist regime in the USSR. In the US we have allowed strip mining, open pit mining, mountaintop removal, lifted regulations on pollution controls and FAR more all in the name of allowing a few already wealthy people and their wealthy investors to get filthy rich without consequence. Hell, we lower their taxes for the trouble of stripping us of what should be held in common. So the idea that the spooky red menace is the only beast to cause ecological disaster is absolutely laughable (sorry to say). We can create a better system of deciding what should happen with natural resources that involves the people (democratically deciding if we should mine an area/dam a river or put in a field of solar cells) and in my opinion we need to in order to prevent total ecological and societal collapse. Yeah people make individual choices (good and bad) that create the world around them, but they make those choices based on input they got from their surrounding society: Create a less pathological, earth-destroying society and you create an individual who is less pathological and less likely to destroy the earth. That's karma. I 100% think that people are and should be expected to care about people besides their extended family. Everyone's health and happiness ultimately impacts us personally.
-------------------- What are all these leaves doing in my mouth? I ain't got a lot but peep my Trade list
|
specialpeopleclub


Registered: 04/10/14
Posts: 5,584
Loc: Mitten
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
|
The mistakes the US made ecologicslly are mostly corrected. We have a well sustained ecosupystem by world standards. The closest mistake would be the Salton Sea.
You cwn pick and choose events, but Russia is cocered in death thst we simply arent
Capitalism in its purest form is negotiation. Younare extrapolating beyond simple defenition. Its like if I described every problem of China instead of saying its 'centralized economics'
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said:

Communism, reclaming land since 1960
What does that photo of the Aral Sea have to do with communism reclaiming land? The Soviet Union used the water from the rivers that filled that lake for irrigation.
Los Angeles did the same to the streams flowing into Mono Lake in the early 1900's. There are countless other examples.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: The mistakes the US made ecologicslly are mostly corrected. We have a well sustained ecosupystem by world standards.
The reason for this is because of Governmental regulations.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Frank Zappotecorum
Smooth-Brained Mycophagist



Registered: 01/01/17
Posts: 138
Loc: Scamdinavia
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: The mistakes the US made ecologicslly are mostly corrected. We have a well sustained ecosupystem by world standards. The closest mistake would be the Salton Sea. You cwn pick and choose events, but Russia is cocered in death thst we simply arent
I'm not picking and choosing events. I'm saying there's nothing inherent in the model of socialist federations that "causes" environmental destruction. Yeah, draining the Aral sea was a Grade A shit move on the part of the soviet union's party leadership, but in the US we play different cat and mouse games to allow people to pollute. Consider the Exxon-Valdez disaster in Cordova AK: They paid what, a couple hundred thousand dollars and got off scott free because they had people on staff that they could pay to speak VERY GOOD Legalese (Lawyers) and weasel their way out of it. I was on a tour of the EPA hedquarters in Durham and one of the scientists there gave a pretty good run-down of how companies basically pump novel Perfluorocarbons into their waste streams because they aren't regulated. It's kinda like the research chemical game only this has direct implications for our groundwater. Pollution has not been solved in America. Hell, we aren't even trying that hard to stop it.
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said: Capitalism in its purest form is negotiation. Younare extrapolating beyond simple defenition. Its like if I described every problem of China instead of saying its 'centralized economics'
I don't agree, and to be honest I don't understand what you mean in that third sentence but I concede that my definition of Capitalism isn't super orthodox. Let's define capitalism as others have the one I'm using is fairly Marxist so I'll revise it so now: Capitalism is the ownership of business and industry by private individuals (found that on google). It doesn't inherently mean that industry doesn't have rules, and doesn't have any sort of regulatory agencies (a state or other corporations) because Keynesian economics (as I understand) follows a mostly capitalist framework but with a LOT more rules and controls than we have now. But it's incorrect to say that capitalism simply boils down to negotiation of the exchange of goods and services because you can negotiate from a socialist angle as well. For instance, in a capitalist system, Exxon-Mobil negotiates with the regulatory agencies to secure drilling permits, and is not directly accountable to the people for anything that happens. Their interactions are mediated by the state, who is stacked with governors and judges and attorney generals that will rule in Exxon's favor unless the people can rustle up some REALLY good legal jiu-jutsu to say "no, you may not drill". However, none of that is really inherent to "Capitalism sensu-lato". In an oligarchy or anarcho-capitalist society, you have no negotiation and whoever pays the crew who gets there the fastest gets the oil. In a far more regulated capitalist system, judges are immediately recall-able if they are clearly only finding in the defense of corporations, and/orthe people can directly vote to not let the company drill. If you were to take that last scenario of a more regulated capitalist system but put a socialist bend on it, the people have direct authority over the company and can say "you know what, we're not drilling here. We voted and have determined it's not a good idea.". It's still negotiation but your socioeconomic mode dictates who the negotiation is done with/through and who has power.
-------------------- What are all these leaves doing in my mouth? I ain't got a lot but peep my Trade list
|
Frank Zappotecorum
Smooth-Brained Mycophagist



Registered: 01/01/17
Posts: 138
Loc: Scamdinavia
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
|
Sorry, I meant in oligarchies or anarcho-capitalist systems the only negotiation you have is who you can get to do the work and how quick they can do it, but there's no real state to mediate it.
-------------------- What are all these leaves doing in my mouth? I ain't got a lot but peep my Trade list
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 5 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: Is Capitalism Good in the Age of Automation? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 2
#26605575 - 04/16/20 11:02 AM (3 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
specialpeopleclub said:

Communism, reclaming land since 1960
What does that photo of the Aral Sea have to do with communism reclaiming land? The Soviet Union used the water from the rivers that filled that lake for irrigation.
Los Angeles did the same to the streams flowing into Mono Lake in the early 1900's. There are countless other examples. 
I'm glad somebody cleared that up because I didn't know WTF it was supposed to be.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
|