Is there a viable alternative to capitalism?
Anarcho-syndicalist communes
Capitalism is an antiquated system that assumes human labor is the limiting factor to production.
>>533704477Full robot+AGI automation where the ruling elite kills all of us so that they can continue living in luxury without having to worry about the environmental effects of such a lavish lifestyle
>>533704477>AI doesn't read Marx either. Lol lamo.
>>533704477>slavery (patricians and plebeians) retarded
>>533705922Plebians were the transformative underclass because they were being undercut by slaveowners and couldn't compete with estates that made use of slaves.
>>533704477>bunch of communist buzzwordsYes, fascism where we execute all you pinkos en mass.If only we could do it.
>>533704477labor and intelligence is close to being detached from people. i dont think this necessarily means everyone will die, we will become more like other animals, and less in control of the direction of things (most of us are never in control of the direction of things anyway)
>>533705987There were tons of plebeians that made up the nobility and they could also own slavesWhy dont you just look things up instead of being retarded
>>533706231Rich plebeians were rare and they were by definition not noble.
>>533706006>just execute anyone unhappy with the system foreverGreat plan that always worked out.
>>533704959This.
>>533706514By the late Republic the majority of senator, around 80-90, came from plebeian nobiles Look how easy it is to just look things up instead of being retarded
>>533704477Yes, tribalism. It's right there.
>>533706928How were they noble if they were plebeians? Just like today you can have poor aristocrats and rich commoners in Britain.
>>533707099Nobility was tied to political achievements.Why dont you just look things up for yourself, takes seconds
>>533706967Tribalism is incompatible with overpopulation though.
Democratic socialism
>>533707378Then don't overpopulate. There shouldn't be this many people. Population density is too high. The capacity of Earth is maybe 100 million.
>>533704477We're not even experiencing proper CapitalismWe're facing Crony Capitalism ratherA hybrid between Social Democracy and Capitalism is probably the idealAnd NO interest rates allowed
>>533704477it's called Distributism It was a Catholic response against capitalism and communism but no one want to REALLY talk about it as if it was en purpose
>Is there a viable alternative to capitalism?unironically Abundance leading to Robotic civilization
>>533704477The big shift in that image is from unorganized tribes to civilization. Slavery never really ended, what happened is that living standards improved because of the trickle down effect of technological progress spurred on by capitalistic endeavors. Slaves, plebs, equestrians, and aristocrats have (relatively) hardly changed in the past two millennia.To answer your question, i'm starting to think there isn't one just like there was no way for hunter gatherers to compete with grain and vegetable farms. Even the CSP (I'm calling them the Chinese Socialist Party now) will never truly make the break to Communism because it's simply too useful to have a currency AKA a measure of worth. The moment you try to erase it, people will just make one up. You can make it abstract and pretend you got rid of it but it will still be there. Abolishment of private property is in a similar boat.
>>533707223No plebian has ever been credited to becoming part of the upper patrician class in the Roman Republic... Maybe after some did, but generally speaking if you weren't land owning or had ties to the senate you were not nobility.
>>533704477yes.
>>533706679>implying it wouldn't work with current year surveillance everywhereIt isn't the stone ages, so dissenters would be found easily and removed.Especially if you did it with something innocuous like a vaccine. Normies can't fathom poisoned vaccines, no matter the evidence.
>>533708598>No plebian has ever been credited to becoming part of the upper patrician class in the Roman Republic... Maybe after some did, but generally speaking if you weren't land owning or had ties to the senate you were not nobility.Yes, plebeians didnt become patricians but they become part of the nobility and later made up 80 to 90% of the senate
>>533708733Kys
>>533707556Sage. The good of the many outweighs the good of the few.
>>533704477We're currently entering Fapitalism.With AI there won't be anything to do other than get high and jerk off.
>>533704721True capitalism hasnt existed for a century or more. Socialism always bails it out. Our current state of subscription model, lease a car, rent a house is practically communism. Those that own homes and cars still share them with others via apps.
>>533704477Things will never change until the intelligence agencies, underground military-industrial-complex lairs and defense contractor facilities are stormed and the glowniggers and parasites who work there are executed and the data they collect is leaked to the public so that the rest of these government assets, zogbots, mercenaries, glorified jannies and authority figures can be hunted down and exterminated.
>>533707556>>533707687If by democracy you mean what the modern world considers democracy then no; letting everyone vote is retarded. I've heard enough from redditors, women, and teenagers to understand that there's nothing they can really contribute to policy even if some of them aren't completely retarded. You lose so much to gain nothing.
>>533704721>antiquatedIt turbocharged industry and personal computing. Like it or hate it but nothing could be more modern. People like you are why I say things like this >>533709679
>>533704477Only one valid answer anything else is pure copium>techno feudalism>bend to Daddy Eeloon>bend to daddy Bessos>bend to daddy peter teal>bend to all tech lords and be happy with your food rations
>>533709655oh yeah? and the employees of such companies get a part of the cake?
>>533704477Well we are going back to a rent seeking economy like feudalism so I think capitalism was just a phase
The greatest weakness of Capitalism is that it always requires bigger, better, faster, more. What happens to a region, state, country or global economy when population decreases? The system collapses, especially one with $38 Trillion in debt.
>>533704477The core problem with dialectics is the premise that class conflict resulted in the end of feudalism and the birth of capitalism.In reality, a new bourgeois formed (the banking class) who feuded with lords (the capital owner class) and the bankers won. There was no proletariat revolution which led to capitalism, the bankers created a better system and the serfs wanted to own their pay through a bank rather than have a lord hold onto their money.The next step does away with the middle man, as the new bourgeois (the technocratic elite) create a peer-to-peer monetary system which supplants banking.
Cybernetic socialismAi and robots do the work and plan the economy
>>533712377Not true capitalism started after the barons wars which led to the signing of the magna Carta
>>533704477Daily reminder that leftoids don't like to discuss what happened before tribalism.
>>533712025No thats social security that requires it. Less young people means they pay relatovely more fo support the elderly. Without social security more people wiuld have kids as part of their retirement plan, and the more you have the less burden you put on each
>>533704477Not really, at least none that we have seen in human history.The thing that makes capitalism work is that capitalism understands and accepts human greed is a beast that can not simply be controlled, it at best can be corralled into a general area or limit of what it can and can get away with. Systems like communism and socialism assume that human green can be fully controlled and done away with, which is just not true, greed is in our blood, and the problem is, no matter how hard you try and wrestle with greed, that beast is eventually gonna buck you off its back, and its gonna hurt. Capitalism is the most fair system we have, because its a simply transactional relationship.You do work, and you are compensated according to the value of that work/scarcity of that skill.IE the harder a skill is, the more you are compensated, the easier something is, the less value it has. The problem capitalism suffers from is that over time it will degrade into an oligarchy because eventually meritocracy will give way to sociopaths who will eventually gain control and establish an oligarchy.
>>533712025>The greatest weaknesses of Capitalism are the things that made it so dominantPlease try to put emotion aside and understand why this statement is so backwards. It's a competition of productivity, that fundamental goal is exactly why it's successful at all.>What happens to a region, state, country or global economy when population decreases?Automation.
>>533712885The problem with capitalism is that if doesnt prevent people from moving away from capitalism? True but if it was the case then thatd also be its weakness if society changed and moved into a post scarcity
>>533704477Checked. What is the name for a system where people are still free to innovate and mass-produce, but everyone grows various food sources of their own too?
>>533713286No the problem with capitalism is that it gives way to an oligarchy, thats not capitalism, thats basically chronism. See the modern CEO scam that goes on in corporate america, CEOs just hop from company to company going directly into C Suite positions, getting golden parachutes each time. The concept of internal promotions to positions of power are a thing of the past, and how we got to where we are now.Im not saying there is not a better system out there then capitalism, but there is none out there thus far that as pulled more people out of poverty and lasted longer then capitalism. Every other form of government either flops hard, becomes corrupted in a matter of decades, or only benefits a very small amount of people. If people want the whole communism thing or socialism, they should do it on a small scale system locally, at that scale it will work because you have a direct relationship to the members of that orginization, IE you actually know these people and have a kinship to them and thus a general wanting to have them be taken care of.
>>533713559You can have capitalism and an ologarchy, you can have capitalism and monarchy etc.. ones an economic syatem the other is political
>>533708278There will always be a system of value. In pre-tribal societies, value was primarily determined by physical power and sexual success. This is how it is in other mammals. The core component of leftist thought is egalitarian thinking. The reality is that such beliefs are religious and not based off of anything real. Engels and his views on women are the prime example of this.
>>533712377Not really... marxs historical dialectics points out that when one mode of production ceases to exist a new one emerges and as a result a new elite class arises and takes over that emerging mode of production, Marx just used the transition phase from feudalism to capitalism as his main focus because he was pretty much smack dead in the middle of the final steps in that transition. This is why he thought that if there was ever a time for the many to take control it was during the age of capitalism, because it was the only mode of production that would become a complete global take over of history, and if the working class didn't take control then the next mode of production will be even worse and more controlling than feudalism.
>>533704477>Is there a viable alternative to capitalism?is there a viable alternative to the laws of physics?
>>533713829Ologarchy stems directly form capitalism though is the thing. An olagarchy is where the rich hold power, and then as a result rig the system of the economy further to benefit them. It feeds one another. Yes you can have capitalism and a monarchy 100% but capitalism and olagarchy are very closely related to one another almost tied at the hip over time.
>>533714088Uh theres been plenty of times oligarchy formed without a capitalist society, all it requires is a group of wealthy or powerful people to take effective control of the government, whether thats overthrowing a tyranny, monarchy etc... or a democracy or being put in place by another nation
>>533704477Don’t worry, neo feudalism is on its way
>>533712377Retards in this thread. Capitalism begins with the large machine. Where common man works with a larger tool he cannot own, and produces what he cannot see, while his work is the measurment stick for the world.Communism is impossible now and in the near future. It will only become a possibility when watt-hours become the ~sole measuring stick in the reproduction of the world, a world in which most human jobs involve expanding energy production and designing/maintaining machines, rather than operating them. And the machine, capable of reproduction, no longer requires an owner/capitalist as do those of today, and man's relationship to becomes, for the first time in history, truly collective.Chinks are working towards this somewhat, recall those headlines of dark factories, autonomous mining equipment, and autonomous freight trucks/trains.An important caveat is that this system, restricted to earth, WILL lead to mass killings of redundant common people. This is the reason for the odd communist Chinese love for Elon Musk (IMO, a confused people's billionaire). Expansion into the wilds of the universe is NECESSARY. In space, with souls unbound by the earth's gravity, humanity could effectively put to work these autonomous materio-societal reproduction machines since YOU CAN MOVE IN ANY DIRECTION, AND THERE ARE THINGS IN EVERY DIRECTION, AND THERE WILL BE UNTIL THE END OF TIME. We'll wield these resources to throw cryo-frozen colonists as far into the abyss as possible, and again, humanity will see the end of time, reunite with Christ, and who knows what'll happen from there.
>>533704477We are already in a post-capitalist system, anon. None of the elites are competing for money anymore. Profits are secondary, and indeed you need only look at the AI industry to see that profits need not even exist at all. The current system is no longer about the accumulation of wealth, but the accumulation of control. Money is a useful tool towards this end, but their goal is no longer to get rich. Their goal is the ability to curate what choices are available to you in every aspect of your lives, down to what information you are allowed to search for online and how you shop. Not by influencing your decisions, but by outsourcing your decisions to a machine that promises that its made the best choice for you via a process you can't double check. Decision offloading machines that are increasingly positioned as non-optional.
>>533714962relationship with the machine becomes*
>>533714962you cant call everyone a retard and then launch into a tirade like that which wont be obvious to everyone and certainly took you some time to construct yourself. how about leading us into it and being nice??
>>533704477>Is there a viable alternative to capitalism?Capitalism but you remove the jewish parasites siphoning 99% of the wealth away.Really, any system (even the dumbest ones) will work wonder compared to the best system but infested with kikes.
>>533712025>The greatest weakness of capitalism is socialismWell said.
>>533704477none that are aligned with human greed. Try as you may, the only way to enforce a master/slave class is to fall back to decadence and privilege. So no matter how progressive you think humanity becomes, it will always revert back to the demons of old to maintain its existence.UBI and that whole new world order thing is about the closest thing that anyone will ever reach to what you are describing. And that in itself makes a mockery of the whole process and humanity's struggle.
>>533709655Then we should take control of this socialist economy and ensure it benefits the majority instead of the cronies, no?
>>533713829depends on the oligarchs. They may have gotten to their position purely off of merit in a purely capitalistic market but there's a very real incentive to stifle competition. Anon is saying there's an inherent cyclical nature to open markets (freedom of speech is similar). If capitalism is going to evolve, it will do so to address exactly that. Artificially incorporating a neutral arbiter or headless oligarch, preemptively occupying the position a monopoly will inevitably seek out to ensure the markets stay open is probably the best bet. NS was a decent stab at this.
Capitalism will be followed by Communism. Many people believe that Communism is the antithesis of Capitalism because of Russia, but this is a misconception. With the advent of room-temperature superconductors and nuclear fusion, humanity will gain access to virtually infinite energy. I have named this the "Energy Revolution", the most significant transformation since the Industrial Revolution. Once the Energy Revolution is realized, seawater desalination will become effortless, providing abundant water, and coupled with the success of cultured meat, humanity can achieve an era of plentiful food. In this scenario, AI will serve as the brain and robots as the body of human labor, while the massive power generated by the Energy Revolution will make these robots universally available. Consequently, humans will be liberated from labor, ushering in an unprecedented era of true mass production. At that point, food and manufactured goods will all become free. Indeed, this era represents the Communism that achieves genuine equality, the next stage of Capitalism and the final chapter of human civilization.
>>533714962I should note one thing:There may be a hidden dynamic between man and this ambiguous network of autonomous nodes that I, perhaps presumptuously, call self-replicating.Note that man eats not only his energy but the materials for his maintenance (iron, calcium, etc.)This future machine may just be a gestating form of this collectively owned automaton, not yet an organism.My fear:A module which takes electricity and forces together the gluons, neutrons, etc. (creating its own chemistry/food) may be a necessary step to achieving this goal, and God knows how hard it'd be to build that...
>>533716498>liberated from laborWill pigs fly in this world of yours?
>>533716498No matter how much you scale things up:Currency will still exist.People will still want to own things beyond their home.A state will persist OR emerge.Communism declares it will get rid of these things and that's why it's forever stuck in the socialist 'transitionary' phase. If I gave the world a dyson sphere, within one decade people wouldl be competing over who gets what % of the energy, who gets to mine which asteroids, etc. People are equally good at solving and inventing problems.
>>533716498There is zero incentive for world elites to undermine the status quo and lose their privileges by introducing free energy, ergo it won't happen. If you made a breakthrough that guaranteed free energy for the masses you'd get disappeared within an hour.You have a very naive view of the world.
The problem with historical materialism is it presupposes progress just happens on its own as a natural force, and that the key feature of social development is that progress gets hung up and delayed by 'blockages' in progress caused by the ruling elite at each stage.It is certainly true that things like bloated bureaucracies and the elites self interest and such have an effect on society but a theory developed where what people need to 'do' to create progress is simply destroy what is being blamed for holding it back is not a good theory. A way to see this is to compare it to its contemporary forms: It is the precursor to modern critical theory. This thought pattern that 'things would naturally be better if not for X and therefore i must struggle against X' is the foundation of all critical theories, admitted by the creator of 'critical theory' himself. Philosophically critical theorists openly embrace the presupposition that progress, civilization, society, inherently exists and moves towards the bettering and the good and that mans main struggle is against things that prevent it.This is simply wrong, though the aformentioned tendency for people currently benefiting to want to cling to their positions of power is real, the only way forward is making new things which are simply so good there is no way to stop them being a replacement. Destruction does not create creation, creation destroys the old. Therefore any worldview or theory that says the most important thing to do is to try and defeat 'the problem' is flawed and can never produce anything good or worthy of replacing the society it is criticizing.
>>533717625>contemporary formsAllen Dulles vs. Yuri Andropov really was one of the greatest battles in history, you can still feel the aftershocks.
>>533717625>presupposes progress just happens on its ownNo it doesn't... its a materialist philosophy based on how we as humans shape and mold history through the material conditions. It goes even deeper into a metaphysical sense as well. Without humans, there is no history. Without humans shaping the world and the material conditions there is no history to "move".
>>533719424It does. Yeah of course 'humans have to do stuff'. The view of historical materialism sees all of human society as derivative of the productive hierarchy the humans have to take in order to produce things from their surroundings. Humans exist in a place, and need to cooperate to produce things in that place, and so a structure for everyone to fit into is formed to facilitate this, and everything else is just a byproduct of the productive activity, all culture, morality, etc is simply mechanistically derived from the productive process and the system of social organization that it necessitates.It presupposes humans will simply do this naturally and the main events in history are when the social order constructed to facilitate it no longer fit the new conditions which the humans of the old order produced. It emphasizes the need to destroy those speed bumps and overcome them with revolutionary energy. Thus the entire body of theory turns itself to detecting and describing all the ways that the current ruling class is oppressing everyone else, the prescribed political action for improving society is the riling up of everyone to destroy that ruling class, and the aftermath will simply naturally reorder itself to something more suitable for the conditions the humans now find themselves in.It is a worldview that, as i said, tells us that destruction is the main willful action required of us humans, and we will happily and prosperously produce things passively if there is nothing standing in our way that needs destroying. This is how critical theories think as well, the problem is the patriarchy, or gender, or racism, or whatever. That things would be good if not for X, and therefore we concern ourselves with overcoming X. Now i believe marx was attempting to develop an actual theory of social evolution, and that critical theories are just a simplified weaponized form of this scape goat thinking, but they have the same flaw.
>>533720018Yes we do "do" things naturally, we are part of this natural universe, and we dictate OUR history through shaking the material conditions. History cannot move forward through thoughts and sounds coming out of our mouths, it needs to be recorded or scribed or celebrated in fancy ways where we create things to remember. We have evidence at the site where the blue stones were carved out for Stonehenge that people who built the structure weren't the people who wanted it built, the people who built it just wanted good quality food, and as a result they moved giant rocks and set in stone a historical time capsule. Otherwise, people eating food wouldn't be remembered. The natural progression happens because we continue to improve on pervious material conditions. Why else would we create and shape the universe around us?
