this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024

1167 points (95.6% liked)

Comic Strips

12768 readers

3693 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
The comic must be a complete story.
If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
You may post comics from others or your own.
If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
Politeness.
Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.

Web of links

[email protected]: "I use Arch btw"
[email protected]: memes (you don't say!)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1167

Capitalism (lemmy.world)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

99 comments fedilink hide all child comments

"Small comic based on the amazing words of Ursula K. Le Guin".

author

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

I mean that's the rub right? Enlightenment liberalism clawed its way out of the corpse of feudalism. Marx assumed communism would do the same thing to the corpse of capitalism. So far he's just been wrong, at least in terms of the revolutionary/vanguardism model. That's why there's been an entire century of revision to that model to incorporate more democratic forward values. It's just you average internet leftist refuses to acknowledge this, because the fan service isn't as good.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Part of the problem is that, while Marx writes well regarding the economic flaws of capitalism, he isn't as good at writing about the politics of change.

When induced by the body politic, we see that some of the economic surplus can be reallocated to the workers provided there is political pressure. It can come in the form of state backed rights, progressive taxation, and even direct welfare payments.

It probably isn't the perfect system Marx envisioned, but enlightened liberalism is able to make subtle shifts over time in a way that absolute monarchies can't.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Your comment portrays a lack of reading of Marxist literature. Lenin, as far back as 1916, talks about this surplus being reallocated to workers through political pressure. He describes the leftists who pursue this as "opportunist socialists", and explains why this is only possible in imperialist countries which exploit the resources and labor of other countries. It's why basically all socialist revolutions have taken place in less developed countries, whether it be democratically like Chile under Allende or Spain and its second republic and Iran under Mosaddegh, or a coup as happened in Libya, or a bloody revolution as in the USSR or Cuba.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

What problems are there with the solutions he gives? Welfare Capitalism solves none of the problems with Capitalism Marx describes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

In what manner has Marx been wrong? Where in the history of Marxism has democracy not been core to the central ideas of it, especially when compared to Capitalism?

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Read Marx, everyone.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

the bottom picture would look pretty cool in a shaun video

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

The quote is correct, but as I recall the divine right didn't end because the people cried out for freedom. Royalty was replaced by governments of the nobility or military, neither of which are necessarily better for the people.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I saw panel 2 and only saw a sales funnel, am I broken? ;)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

At least you saw a funnel.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

I don't really fit in that well here at times because I don't consider Capitalism as having anything to do with governance. Capitalism is a market system that uses competition to drive efficiency of creation of satisfaction of needs and luxuries both. If your democratic system of laws is being leveraged by highly efficient non-state entities, then you should really fix that shit, but fixing it doesn't require abolishing private property nor would that end corruption.

[+] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Ok, any other historical solutions that have worked?

Most of Europe has phenomenal education and happiness rates with low crime rates despite the massive impoverished refugee camps they've taken in out of goodwill. If competent legislative reform and regulation doesn't work then businesses wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to stop it. Better question: When has that other option ever worked?

It doesn’t “use” competition, competition is sometimes a condition, but capitalism works actively against competition.

And the absolute authority of the state to seize any and all assets, allocate all resources wherever they see fit, works actively against competition to a much higher degree, among the many other reasons not to do that. For an example look at Chinese housing infrastructure: everybody was built a home, massive complexes paid for by the public by lowest bidders and people with connections rather than by developers and contractors. The problem is the homes weren't built in the places those people live and work, so there is a massive homelessness problem in China and many housing units have sat vacant since they were built. And the amount of blood sacrificed to build this ineffective system under Mao was astronomical.

And that's a controversial take. I could have brought up the USSR.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

This comic would slap harder if not for the Supreme Court under christofascist influence from the belief in the divine right of kings having today ruled that Presidents are immune from prosecution for official acts.

That whole divine king thing isn't nearly as dead as the last panel would like to portray it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

I do think that every cultures political system is structured the way that it is for a reason. Based off the history and experiences of the peoples of that country.

[+] [email protected] -11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The whole point of capitalism (unintentionally?) is to make everything so efficient that there no longer is a reason to have profit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

the point of capitalism is to make it so that there's no longer a reason to have profit.

That's gotta be the stupidest take I've seen in the whole 28 days I've been in Lemmy, congratulations. The whole point of capitalism is the revalorization of capital, i.e., a capitalist owner having $1mn, and investing it into a company or finance or housing to turn it into more than $1mn. In what universe is the objective of capitalism to eliminate profit?????? It's the polar opposite...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

People are greedy and given tools that make it easier and easier to start more and more types of business, profit margins will continue to get thinner and thinner as competition increases to keep portfolios growing.

Standards of living will continue to rise(average over time as it always has) as the amount of human labor hours needed to maintain the standard continues to drop. Fully automated food production is not that far away. When that happens there will be a large incentive for more and more business startups as food producers with very low cost and very low profit margin. Competition will keep prices extremely low to the point that individuals may be able to produce their own food as the process gets cheaper and more efficient.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

profit margins will continue to get thinner and thinner as competition increases

Competition doesn't increase under capitalism, it decreases as a consequence of economy of scale, consolidation of markets, corruption and many other reasons. Tell me how competition fosters when Amazon, Google, Walmart, Apple, Uber and the rest of big firms control all their respective markets.

Your second paragraph is a senseless utopian dream not based on reality, I won't even bother arguing against it.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments