Private Ownership of Social Rules is Inherently Anti-Democratic - eviltoast

Remember, the social Democrats sided with the Nazis over the socialists. They’ve done it every time they’ve been given the opportunity, and will continue to do so as many times as people fall for their shtick.

“The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house."
-Audre Lorde

  • EpicFailGuy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Under TRUE capitalism the market is free but regulated as needed.

    We don’t live in real capitalism, there is no regulation, the oligarchy has captured the agencies that were supposed to regulate the market.

    I don’t even know what to call what we have, plutocracy?

    • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      True capitalism is what we live in. Competition has winners, those winners gain outsized advantages. They use those advantages to purchase regulatory frameworks which benefit them. This is inevitable, and has happened in every single capitalist society in the history of the ideology. Monopoly is the natural end state of capitalism. (Actually, fascism is, but monopoly happens along the way also)

      • EpicFailGuy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I found this interesting tidbit in Wikipedia trying to find where I read my source.

        • Capitalism 1.0 during the 19th century entailed largely unregulated markets with a minimal role for the state (aside from national defense, and protecting property rights)

        • Capitalism 2.0 during the post-World War II years entailed Keynesianism, a substantial role for the state in regulating markets, and strong welfare states

        • Capitalism 2.1 entailed a combination of unregulated markets, globalization, and various national obligations by states

        You’re right … It sounds like we need another paradigm shift. Fuck web 3 … we need Capitalism 3 …

        • LazyCorvid@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Or how about we just stop using capitalism?

          If version 1.0 didn’t work, version 2.0 didn’t work and version 2.1 didn’t work, then maybe the problem is capitalism itself.

        • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          or we finally move past capitalism. It had 200 years, and it just keeps generating worse and worse crises, let’s just finally accept it’s not working.

          • EpicFailGuy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            not a bad idea, what is your suggestion? Socialism seems to be working well for the European people, but we’d need some kind of check and balance so it doesn’t descend into the clusterfuck they seem to be going thru (not unlike ours)

    • MenKlash@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Under TRUE capitalism the market is free but regulated as needed.

      The market can’t be free if it’s regulated. Any intromission of the State in any voluntary exchange is stepping in the natural rights of its citizens.

      We don’t live in real capitalism, there is no regulation, the oligarchy has captured the agencies that were supposed to regulate the market.

      The agencies are the oligarchy. The politicians and lobbyists benefit each other by the existence of regulations, taxation, subsidies, FIAT money, intellectual property, public licenses, monopolical privileges, etc.

      Yes, we don’t live in “real capitalism” (that is, in a free-market setting), we live in a corporatocracy.