• squid_slime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    The flaw in capitalism and the flaw that makes it unmanageable is how over time capitalism will find ways to extract more for less.

    This will always fall to the workers. The recent recession had tax payers bail out the banks as well as pay bonuses. all because banks got very greedy.

    • Juice@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Its not a flaw, its working as planned. But yeah, our “market solutions”, basically any problem created by capitalism just gets exploited for profit. Even when the economy crashes its actually a good thing for the very rich, as it " disciplines" labor, moves people down and out of the middle class which lowers wages systematically, takes out a few competitors, etc.,

      • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Even when the economy crashes its actually a good thing for the very rich, as it " disciplines" labor, moves people down and out of the middle class which lowers wages systematically, takes out a few competitors, etc.,

        If you look at it, every crisis always results in transfer of wealth up. Covid was the biggest up to date.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      There are other things unmanageable.

      Like a nuclear superpower with vast fertile southern lands fit for growing grapes, sea access with fishing fleet, and all such, which had a significant part of population under threat of scurvy. Because capitalism makes logistics work, it’s the reason European colonial empires could exist.

      Or the same nuclear superpower, which boasted widespread literacy and all that, except that conveniently ignored Central Asian areas mostly busy with growing, collecting and processing cotton. Damn right, my dear. These were, ahem, not very developed even in 1991.

      Or the same nuclear superpower, which had a powerful standardization apparatus, but when you look at its tank models or anything else, the components which could be interchangeable were just slightly incompatible. They were designed by people with the same kind of education and understanding and context, for the same purpose, but, first, every defense plant or research institute or something wanted to have their standard and they did get it, second, due to secrecy and vertical administrative structure there were little communication between them.

      Or a system of logistics, that turned into shit the moment that superpower decided to leave the chat, leaving populations of whole countries foraging for wood to not freeze at winter.

      Capitalism works differently, because it (any human actually, you included) tries to get more with less. Non-market instruments are supposed to constrain it to doing that only honestly.

      • squid_slime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        I would never advocate for a super power, I want a classless society, this means no political class either.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          “Political Class” isn’t really a thing, though, unless you’re replacing Class with Category, in which case “plumber” and “janitor” would be distinct classes. Administration and management are forms of labor, and are necessary in large-scale complex production, even Anarchists concede this.

          • squid_slime@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I wish this was true. But as seen in history a class does developed around the political leader. This is why the country cried with the death of Stalin, he was a god to the workers. This isn’t how the vanguard should look in the push towards a classless society.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              In what manner is it not?

              Edit to respond to your edit: I think you are confusing power with classes, and hierarchy with classes. A class is defined by its social relation to the Means of Production, a CEO can technically be proletarian if they are merely employed by the board and have no ownership. There is hierarchy, and unequal power, but the relation to Capital is fundamentally different as the M-C-M’ circuit does not directly funnel into their pockets like it would with Capitalists.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I edited mine as well, I’ll copy and paste it here for coherence:

                  I think you are confusing power with classes, and hierarchy with classes. A class is defined by its social relation to the Means of Production, a CEO can technically be proletarian if they are merely employed by the board and have no ownership. There is hierarchy, and unequal power, but the relation to Capital is fundamentally different as the M-C-M’ circuit does not directly funnel into their pockets like it would with Capitalists.

                  • squid_slime@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    I guess my previous response about not supporting superpowers still holds but yes was a bit silly to say class.