Originally posted by DINSTAAR
The type of carnivorous capitalism you claim is the cause of violence is a product of thousands of years of violent religious conditioning starting
Hmm that is your opinion, I do not agree with it. Yes religion has been a part of it, but not so much as capitalism in this modern age. Also I could
argue that the religion gets its power from, and has been shaped by, the capitalist system. The church is part of the state system. The state system
we have is a product of the last 300 years of capitalism, starting in Europe.
The change from feudalism to capitalism was the most significant change in Human society for thousands of years before it. It is what forced the
'commoners' off the land, where they were self sufficient, autonomous, into factories, and mills, which caused them/us to become reliant on the
private owner for 'jobs', and the state system that built around it. This was land owners taking advantage of the change in the law, that allowed
land owners to sell plots of land, which also allowed them to deny use of that land to the 'commoners'. Feudalism became capitalism, the mass
exploitation of the proletariat...
"Capitalism, the appropriation of capital by some to the exclusion of others." Louis Blanc
, French socialist 1850.
Most of our modern social ills started when the commoners were forced off the land, and into factories and mills.
This created cities, and cities always have more crime than rural areas.
This also created an alternative from the workers, they called it socialism. Workers owning the means of production. So they could be autonomous
again, but within the new modern industrial world capitalism created.
Or if you wanted, back to living free off the land.
You have not substantiated your claims. I have mine.
Huh? Two hundred years of history have substantiated my claims. Your claims ignore the root of the problem, and place blame elsewhere.
The fact that the rich-poor divide gets wider substantiates my claim. The fact that most social crime comes from areas and people of poverty
substantiates my claim. The fact that workers do not earn the full fruits of their labour substantiates my claims. The fact that most crime is
property crime substantiates my claims. The fact that we have the labour, and machinery, to produce enough for all the worlds populations but don't
substantiates my claims.
I don't have to substantiate it, you need to see reality.
All you have is misunderstandings and faith in a system that has no rules, other than those forced on it by government, no morality, no desire to meet
It is not exploitation to benefit from any exchange in commodity. In fact, it is innate in the exchange of commodities that a benefit must be
received from both sides.
But labour is not treated as a commodity and given the full rate of it's worth, so yes it is exploitation.
Both sides yield a benefit from each other. Only if the employee is not payed (slavery) or coerced into working a specific job for a set price
is it exploitation.
I have a job. I can leave that job and work somewhere else. No one is forcing me to stay there.
The scarcity of jobs forces people to stay where they are. Don't try to pretend 'jobs' are in abundance, they're not and never have been. Scarcity
is a necessary condition of capitalism. Most people do not have the luxury of just changing jobs. But even if you do change jobs you're still
working for a private owner, who is exploiting you by not giving you the full worth of your labour. For the private owner to make profit the worker
has to produce more than they are paid for. It is the profit system of capitalists that keep capitalists in control of the means of production. It
is what keep workers from owning the means themselves in order to produce what they need.
If there was a real choice and there were an abundance of worker owned companies then you would have a real choice. But we're not taught about worker
owned systems in this capitalist state school system. Everything you are taught is biased towards capitalism. You have to learn to separate your
thoughts from that conditioning, and look at reality.
Capitalism is a profit based economic system, socialism is a needs based economic system.
You are putting the cart before the horse. Authoritarianism has existed before capitalism, and capitalism itself is not violent. When you put
any economic system in a violent society, it becomes violent, corrupt, and barely noticeable from its ideology.
Yes it did, but not to the extent as when the mass exploitation of the commoners started.
Capitalism is inherently violent because you have to protect capital. You can't say what it is, or what it isn't, because it will be whatever it
needs to be to ensure the private owner makes profit. The term simply means private ownership of the means of production, those private owners will
do whatever it takes to ensure that they make profit. They have to, otherwise they stop being capitalists, and fail. You can not guarantee that
capitalism is not violent, if it takes violence to make profit then violent it will be. Do you know
what war is? (the most obvious
Capitalism is corrupt, it is a corrupt system because it was based on corruption from the beginning. At it's start it was no different than what the
Mafia did. At least the Mafia didn't take away everybody's home, craft, living, and force them into industrial wage slavery in order to empower
themselves financially in order to build a state system to protect themselves.
You can't stop the natural tendency for capitalists to form monopolies from the concentration of capital into smaller and smaller groups of owners.
That is the result of capitalist competition.
"The workers" are not a homogenous, single-minded group. They could be only if "the workers" organized themselves completely voluntarily. If
there were no choice, then some form of proxy government would exist to enforce the organization. If a market is to be free, the marketplace would
also have to be free for capitalists to organize a private company (not corporation, that is an entity of the state).
I never said they were. But I think the one thing we all have in common is we want liberty, and you can't have liberty if you are being financially
exploited and are constantly competing with each other for resources made artificially scarce by capitalists.
You don't need to enforce voluntary organizations. If people wish to not work for a cooperative then they don't have to. All this forcing and
controlling people is a 'right-wing' capitalist notion. No one needs to be forced to do something that is in their best interest.
See there is a conflict of interest, we need resources, capitalists want profits.
Anarcho-socialism/communism/whatever would only work in a completely free market, thus allowing for capitalism to exist as well.
Yes FREE MARKET. Capitalism is NOT free market, I really do hope you're not basing your whole argument for capitalism on that myth, I could have
saved some typing lol. If you are then you have some learning to do. You could actually be a socialist and not realise it, because you misunderstand
Your understanding of capitalism is akin to someone understanding socialism as the USSR.
What I propose is a free market anarchy. All organizations will be voluntary, and likely will work together to protect the peace in society
(community policing etc).
But mate that is what we all want. Socialism is the only way to have free market anarchism. Capitalism and free market are not synonyms. Capitalism
can never be libertarian, as I have explained.
Not all competition is bad. The mark of a peaceful society is an open society, were ideas, methodology, science, religion, and products are
constantly questioned, augmented, enhanced, shared, competing for legitimacy, and absolutely NOT violently preserved in stasis.
It is when every aspect of our lives become overtly competitive. It doesn't create an open society, it makes people who are constantly working to be
better than everyone else, which creates social conflict as we all stop seeing each other as equal but as someone you have to be better than.
It concentrates capital into smaller and smaller groups who monopolize the economy, as mentioned.
All natural traits are bad if they're perpetuated and exploited. The system exploits our emotions.
edit on 4/8/2012 by ANOK because: This space for rent, U2U for rates...