I am not familiar with that particular situation but I’m absolutely sure that the answer lies in exploitation, oppression and manipulation. Everything can be traced back to it in capitalism.
And I suggest that it does not matter anymore who is the most cooperative group because you have all encompassing totalitarian rule of capital. You could think of a much better system and be discredited by the capital owned media, jailed by the capital owned nationstates, etc.
There is always the all encompassing totalitarian rule of capital. People trade in prisoner of war camps. Everything has a value and people will exchange things by value unless they have a joined identity. Capital doesn’t crush families. Why should capital try to crush cooperating people who don’t oppose capital itself?
Now you’re mixing trade and capitalism. Trade is much older than capitalism and is also part of the massive majority of non capitalist states and groups.
Capital doesn’t crush families.
Ask americans who are right now losing their families due to capital interests (e.g. health insurance)
Why should capital try to crush cooperating people who don’t oppose capital itself?
It doesnt, necessarily. It absorbs them, makes them profitable, etc. It corrupts everything by making it part of profit generation. E.g. Nelson Mandela. It changes the narrative to paint them as friends when the same people today would be killed as terrorists.
It only crushes those which will not let themselves be absorbed. Those who through systemic and continuous effort shield themselves from capitalist influence. It discredits them, brands them as enemies, openly lies about them and uses the nation states to back it up.
State propaganda is real in every country on earth. We’re living under the totalitarian rule of capital.
Those who through systemic and continuous effort shield themselves from capitalist influence. It discredits them, brands them as enemies,
I am curious how NEET will handle this. They tick all the boxes.
We’re living under the totalitarian rule of capital.
What I meant to say is that the totalitarian part comes from our brain doing value judgements. If it wouldn’t, Capitalism wouldn’t work. Capitalism is a reflection of our mind.
If that makes Capitalism inevitable, could it be that we need more instead of less Capitalism for a better society?
What I meant to say is that the totalitarian part comes from our brain doing value judgements.
Totalitarian comes from wikipedia:
A system of government where the people have virtually no authority and the state wields absolute control of every aspect of the country, socially, financially and politically.
This has nothing to do with value judgement. To say totalitarian is good or bad is a value judgement.
If it wouldn’t, Capitalism wouldn’t work.
Capitalism doesnt work. It consumes itself.
Capitalism is a reflection of our mind
Sorry but I’m at the point where this is becoming very hard to take serious. Capitalism came from feudalism whete we already had massive wealth accumulation of wealth and slavery. You’re mixing up nature with nurture.
If that makes Capitalism inevitable, could it be that we need more instead of less Capitalism for a better society?
That would be anarcho capitalism. The fascists wet dream. Of course this would make a “better” society for the owner class but you would suffer and die at work while they sniff cocaine off someones butt.
Neoliberalist takes will always lead to more inequality, more suffering and more monopolies. Look at the US. They have more capitalism now. They’re dying like flies, outlawing books that picture the dystopian fresh hell they’re building and pushing so much anti trans propaganda that goebbels would be envious.
Without the expectation of being taken serious I want to double down.
In feudal times, peasants were controlled by the sword. They didn’t have access to swords and couldn’t change their situation.
Capitalism has the militarized police, but the main weapon is the control of the markets.
Profits are made with the prices that the peasants are willing to pay.
At least in theory, it’s within reach of the peasants to influence those prices because those prices are living in their heads.
You’re onto something… About not being taken seriously.
One needs to have serious delusions to believe making the situation even worse would somehow make it better. except maybe by waking people up and spark violent uprising but the death toll would be insane and empathy forbids that idea.
And the assumption of “theoretical reach of influence” in full knowledge of the nuclear arsenal that states wield, only someone with no grip on reality would suggest thay this in earnest.
I am not familiar with that particular situation but I’m absolutely sure that the answer lies in exploitation, oppression and manipulation. Everything can be traced back to it in capitalism.
And I suggest that it does not matter anymore who is the most cooperative group because you have all encompassing totalitarian rule of capital. You could think of a much better system and be discredited by the capital owned media, jailed by the capital owned nationstates, etc.
There is always the all encompassing totalitarian rule of capital. People trade in prisoner of war camps. Everything has a value and people will exchange things by value unless they have a joined identity. Capital doesn’t crush families. Why should capital try to crush cooperating people who don’t oppose capital itself?
Now you’re mixing trade and capitalism. Trade is much older than capitalism and is also part of the massive majority of non capitalist states and groups.
Ask americans who are right now losing their families due to capital interests (e.g. health insurance)
It doesnt, necessarily. It absorbs them, makes them profitable, etc. It corrupts everything by making it part of profit generation. E.g. Nelson Mandela. It changes the narrative to paint them as friends when the same people today would be killed as terrorists.
It only crushes those which will not let themselves be absorbed. Those who through systemic and continuous effort shield themselves from capitalist influence. It discredits them, brands them as enemies, openly lies about them and uses the nation states to back it up.
State propaganda is real in every country on earth. We’re living under the totalitarian rule of capital.
I am curious how NEET will handle this. They tick all the boxes.
What I meant to say is that the totalitarian part comes from our brain doing value judgements. If it wouldn’t, Capitalism wouldn’t work. Capitalism is a reflection of our mind.
If that makes Capitalism inevitable, could it be that we need more instead of less Capitalism for a better society?
Totalitarian comes from wikipedia:
This has nothing to do with value judgement. To say totalitarian is good or bad is a value judgement.
Capitalism doesnt work. It consumes itself.
Sorry but I’m at the point where this is becoming very hard to take serious. Capitalism came from feudalism whete we already had massive wealth accumulation of wealth and slavery. You’re mixing up nature with nurture.
That would be anarcho capitalism. The fascists wet dream. Of course this would make a “better” society for the owner class but you would suffer and die at work while they sniff cocaine off someones butt.
Neoliberalist takes will always lead to more inequality, more suffering and more monopolies. Look at the US. They have more capitalism now. They’re dying like flies, outlawing books that picture the dystopian fresh hell they’re building and pushing so much anti trans propaganda that goebbels would be envious.
Without the expectation of being taken serious I want to double down.
In feudal times, peasants were controlled by the sword. They didn’t have access to swords and couldn’t change their situation.
Capitalism has the militarized police, but the main weapon is the control of the markets. Profits are made with the prices that the peasants are willing to pay.
At least in theory, it’s within reach of the peasants to influence those prices because those prices are living in their heads.
You’re onto something… About not being taken seriously.
One needs to have serious delusions to believe making the situation even worse would somehow make it better. except maybe by waking people up and spark violent uprising but the death toll would be insane and empathy forbids that idea.
And the assumption of “theoretical reach of influence” in full knowledge of the nuclear arsenal that states wield, only someone with no grip on reality would suggest thay this in earnest.