This is RW-bait and I can’t resist. “Capitalism” is a functionally...
Dave Greene@GreeneMan6
19 views
Dec 02, 2024
~2 min read
Advertisement
1
This is RW-bait and I can’t resist.
“Capitalism” is a functionally meaningless concept in the 21st century. Our pretend-money-printer economy has almost no resemblance to the hard-money-hard-industry economic system Marx critiqued. Thus, for modern Marxists, the concept is used to complain about elements of ordinary human life that have always existed: e.g. “Capitalism is just when there is inequality!” or “Capitalism is just when people are expected to work for a living!”.
If you define Capitalism as an element of human nature that has always existed and that can’t even be removed from highly controlled microcosms (like college classrooms) then it’s entirely unsurprising that people can’t realistically imagine an alternative. Fischer’s famous saying is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Now I will say here, some modern classic Marxists have tried to save themselves from this problem by retreating to a more classic understanding of Capitalism, aka “any time private citizens own assets that generate wealth”. This is a problem though, because now the only “alternative to Capitalism” is a type of “state-seizes-all-meaningful-property” government. This type of state was considered tyrannical in ancient times, and when it’s been tried in modernity it’s been a disaster. This is why all modern “socialists” prefer capitalist economies like Sweden to non-capitalist top-down approaches like the old-school CCP.
Hey, you know what makes abolishing capitalism seem unimaginable? When every public ANTI-CAPITALIST points to a CAPITALIST country as their ideal practical model.
And the situation only gets sillier when you consider “liberalism”. Liberalism actually is a coherent concept; it is the idea that people should be able to “self-govern” their personal lives in accordance with free choice. The problem, in the 21st century, is that everyone both right, left, and center can see that liberalism is dying. And we’re all tired of pretending that it’s not.
Why is it dying? Well because it requires two things. First a strong sense of morality and responsibility common society wide. Second, direct economic responsibility for the management of personal wealth outcomes. As morality decreases and the managerial revolution centralizes responsibility in the corporate-state alliance, liberalism makes less and less sense. Perhaps this is the natural consequence of technology but there also is a political dimension to this process.
And that’s where this gets really ironic, because the leftist political project ENCOURAGES the deracination, demoralization, and centralization which are the key forces KILLING liberalism today.
It is impossible to have a liberal society constituted of atomized hedonists.
It is impossible to have a liberal society where all economic assets are centrally managed by the corporation/state.
So I am sorry left liberals this is the end of the road. Like Pogo you have met the enemy, and he is you.
“Capitalism” is a functionally meaningless concept in the 21st century. Our pretend-money-printer economy has almost no resemblance to the hard-money-hard-industry economic system Marx critiqued. Thus, for modern Marxists, the concept is used to complain about elements of ordinary human life that have always existed: e.g. “Capitalism is just when there is inequality!” or “Capitalism is just when people are expected to work for a living!”.
If you define Capitalism as an element of human nature that has always existed and that can’t even be removed from highly controlled microcosms (like college classrooms) then it’s entirely unsurprising that people can’t realistically imagine an alternative. Fischer’s famous saying is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Now I will say here, some modern classic Marxists have tried to save themselves from this problem by retreating to a more classic understanding of Capitalism, aka “any time private citizens own assets that generate wealth”. This is a problem though, because now the only “alternative to Capitalism” is a type of “state-seizes-all-meaningful-property” government. This type of state was considered tyrannical in ancient times, and when it’s been tried in modernity it’s been a disaster. This is why all modern “socialists” prefer capitalist economies like Sweden to non-capitalist top-down approaches like the old-school CCP.
Hey, you know what makes abolishing capitalism seem unimaginable? When every public ANTI-CAPITALIST points to a CAPITALIST country as their ideal practical model.
And the situation only gets sillier when you consider “liberalism”. Liberalism actually is a coherent concept; it is the idea that people should be able to “self-govern” their personal lives in accordance with free choice. The problem, in the 21st century, is that everyone both right, left, and center can see that liberalism is dying. And we’re all tired of pretending that it’s not.
Why is it dying? Well because it requires two things. First a strong sense of morality and responsibility common society wide. Second, direct economic responsibility for the management of personal wealth outcomes. As morality decreases and the managerial revolution centralizes responsibility in the corporate-state alliance, liberalism makes less and less sense. Perhaps this is the natural consequence of technology but there also is a political dimension to this process.
And that’s where this gets really ironic, because the leftist political project ENCOURAGES the deracination, demoralization, and centralization which are the key forces KILLING liberalism today.
It is impossible to have a liberal society constituted of atomized hedonists.
It is impossible to have a liberal society where all economic assets are centrally managed by the corporation/state.
So I am sorry left liberals this is the end of the road. Like Pogo you have met the enemy, and he is you.
Matt McManus@MattPolProf
Its now easier to imagine the end of liberalism than the end of capitalism.
