• Soup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you want to end capitalism this ain’t it. They want anarcho-capitalism, which is just an extreme form of capitalism that assumes everyone has the best of intentions. It’s capitalism except without any pesky “regulations” or “having to help literally anyone else”. The only driving force behind anything is money you have access to in your short lifetime and holding onto your private property at all costs.

    It’s the purest, worst possible form of capitalism if you care about other people to any degree. The only people that think it’s a good idea are people who currently believe that capitalism would totally work if we would just let corporations do whatever they wanted and if taxes were voluntary. In reality most of our labour laws are written so to stop shit like locking people inside a factory so they wouldn’t go on a break and watching them die from a fire multiple times. Building codes exist to stop them creating death-traps, and since they don’t a give a rat’s ass about the longterm we have to be constantly fighting them with environmental regulations so that future generations can survive.

    In short, any anarcho-capitalist society would end up needing to have worker unions(governments) to protect people in the end, the workers would want a say in affairs(a vote), and there would be union dues(taxes). The only difference is that if you aren’t working you don’t get to have access to, or say in, anything that happens.

    It’s dogshit.

    • sgibson5150@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      My bad. I misread it as AnCom. I wouldn’t have said that if I’d read AnCap. Thanks for the lecture.

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yea, fair. Also an extreme ideology that would be great but probably not feasible. At least it makes an effort to care about people and put power in the hands of those actually doing literally anything vaguely productive.

    • MasterPain@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s the purest, worst possible form of capitalism if you care about other people to any degree. The only people that think it’s a good idea are people who currently believe that capitalism would totally work if we would just let corporations do whatever they wanted and if taxes were voluntary. In reality most of our labour laws are written so to stop shit like locking people inside a factory so they wouldn’t go on a break and watching them die from a fire multiple times. Building codes exist to stop them creating death-traps, and since they don’t a give a rat’s ass about the longterm we have to be constantly fighting them with environmental regulations so that future generations can survive.

      In short, any anarcho-capitalist society would end up needing to have worker unions(governments) to protect people in the end, the workers would want a say in affairs(a vote), and there would be union dues(taxes). The only difference is that if you aren’t working you don’t get to have access to, or say in, anything that happens.

      That is just misinformation, checkout real life examples: https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.306.0115

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        So the best you got is medieval Iceland? And one of the main point is just on the height of people there while the other is trying to pull the concept of fair wages from butter and meat and shit? The scale alone is so incredibly small and the needs so localized that it has absolutely nothing to do with modern life in the slightest. It is so far removed from our reality that it might as well not be touched on at all when the United States, the shining beacon of capitalism, started with very few regulations and then needed a bunch because “the market” wasn’t doing it’s fucking job.

        They also compared Icelandic chieftains to feudal lords in England. Capitalism was invented to keep the idea of the monarchy going when it was clear that citizens of the world were getting fed up with their lords just doing whatever the fuck they wanted simply because they had the money to do so. Making that comparison is almost literally showing how, with a larger population, capitalism ceases to function and just becomes taxation without representation. It’s the same with any extreme ideology, in the end, where it demands full cooperation which simply cannot happen.

        Tell me, in your own words, why my points are incorrect. Tell me why Medieval Iceland is a good example when we have so many modern examples of less regulation leading to more needless suffering.

        Bonus:

        You can still have money in other systems. The reason capitalism just doesn’t work is because it puts all the importance on said money, ahead of all of the people who exist in the world. A person is reduced down to their possessions and how much capital they have and can earn in the short term, and without those things they are thrown aside. Big money means big power and it can use that to further decrease the power of people. We’re seeing it everywhere right now. And more and more the people are afraid of losing what little money they have and so are allowing some horrible things to happen to themselves and others out of fear of losing their scraps.

        It just doesn’t work.