capitalism > communism bc basically runs itself. didn't need to be introduced through cataclysmic violence. gradually evolved out of political realities and common law vs. conceived as an ad hoc solution to the world at large by a resentful, egg-head, patronizing, false prophet.
Conversation
Replying to
Have you read Braudel or other early histories of capitalism? It's not quite that clean. In mercantilist pre-modern form it managed to bootstrap slavery and militarist colonialism without much of an ideological egghead air cover going.
2
1
4
Replying to
there's no "it". "it" does nothing, does not act. the strong subject the weak. the air cover was people pretending this was just or moral. more and more I think nobody ever believed that
1
Replying to
There is an it. Sorry, just because there is no subject that can be blamed doesn't mean there isn't a coherent complex system of mechanisms that exhibits emergent intentionality and has clear effects.
2
1
Replying to
I can't begin to think about effects because the data is all polluted. there's no meaningful control. Also we're, like, inside it.
1
Replying to
I mean I know you're an anti-marxist crusader, but seriously, the threat of marxism is not so huge now that you have to put lipstick on the happy pig of capitalism. I think fears of modern communism 2.0 are leading to some sort of dangerous idealization of capitalism.
2
1
Replying to
my sense is the hard left is gaining, mostly due to despair. I'm an anti-marxist I guess, also sort of a recovering Marxist
1
Replying to
Nah, it's just some superficial rhyming. There are no Stalins lurking behind the pronoun warriors, anymore than there are Hitlers lurking behind the proudboys. It's all idiots larping behind scary historical masks.
1
Replying to
I'm more concerned with the Jacobinkin. they're smart, and sorta world beating so far imo. have a great market of resentment to tap into... people failing out of woke neoliberalism
1
Replying to
There's going to be a certain minimum level of damage involved in the level of inequality correcting itself. This is a blindspot of woke neoliberalism. They refuse to admit that inequality is in any sense a problem at all. They're still thinking it's some sort of mass confusion.
2
1
Trumpism distracted us from thinking through inequality. We kinda hit pause on that debate in 2014 and need to pick it up again. To pretend it's a non-problem is to hand reins over to hard left, just as pretending white-left-behindness was a non-problem handed reins to Trumpism.
Replying to
I just can't imagine a fundament, a base layer, upon which the population of this country can reach some kind of compromise solution.
1
Replying to
I can. All countries of this size are going to fragment, either de facto (more regional political autonomy) or de jure (countries splitting off).
2
Show replies

