• 0 Posts
  • 51 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 16th, 2023

help-circle
  • I also believe that the human element might be a problem with communism. One of the ingenious things about capitalism is that it takes a terrible vice - greed - and yokes it for everyone’s benefit. I believe that our system is out of whack, though. The degree of inequality that we tolerate is outrageous - these days, the richest scoop up all the benefits and leave the workers only enough to survive (or less). The fact that 3 men control more wealth than the poorest 175,000,000 other Americans is offensive - especially when you consider that the poorest have no homes or food. It’s even worse when you look beyond American borders.


  • Thanks for the reply! The article you linked was very interesting. I am aware that western propaganda emphasizes the challenges and failures of communism while sweeping the manifold problems with capitalism under the rug, and it is nice to consider a different viewpoint. There is also an unfair tendency among western philosophers to link authoritarianism with communism when there is no philosophical connection. My personal belief is that authoritarianism was already pervasive in imperial Russia and China, and that better explains the brutality that has been unfairly associated with communism.

    I would also like to say that capitalism is way less efficient than people are led to believe - take fast fashion, for example. Excess shoes and clothes are constantly being dumped on developing countries because the manufacturers failed to find a buyer at any price.


  • OP didn’t respond so I will take a shot. My understanding is that under communism, the economy has to be planned by the government. Under capitalism, the price of shoes (for example) is usually determined by the demand for shoes and the amount of shoes that can be manufactured. If demand falls, the price falls. If manufacturing capacity increases, the price falls more, etc. This mechanism has feedback loops that make it efficient. In theory, companies never make more shoes than they can sell, because if they do make too many, they can sell the excess by cutting prices. Under communism there is no free market, so the mechanics of supply and demand don’t work. Some communist bureaucrat conducts a study and estimates that the country will need 100k pairs of shoes next quarter. The government then makes those shoes in a state-owned factory. Suppose, though, that it turns out that the country needed more. With no free market, there is no competitor to step in and meet the demand for shoes - now you have a shortage. Similarly, you can have considerable waste if you grow too many apples or whatever. In true communism, there is no price to adjust - you either have an apple voucher or you don’t. Thus there is generally more problems meeting demand efficiently. This is, in fact, exactly what we saw under the Soviet Union - the stores were often stuffed with unwanted items while long lines developed for items that were in high demand. Without any consideration of authoritarianism etc., this is an often-cited reason for the failure of communism.

    I am not a political theorist or an economist, so please correct me if I am wrong.






  • Fair enough. Here is my take on why a person might vote for trump (aside from bigotry, hatred of trans people, etc): I think some people consider a Trump vote a protest vote. The condition of many black people in America has been bad under both democrats and republicans (though for the last several decades, republicans have been demonstrably worse). Institutional racism is real, and people are angry about the status quo. I think many people feel like both democrats and establishment republicans have failed them, and voting for an outsider might be a way to shake up the system. However, as a protest vote, Trump is a poor choice. He is the apotheosis of white privilege. He was born rich. His family business was notorious for discriminating against black people (both under DJT and his father). His own family members have warned the public that Trump is racist towards black people. His comments and actions during his first term are not consistent with a leader who wants to help people of colour. Trump is definitely shaking things up, but it won’t be in a way that benefits anyone but straight white Christians of means.

    I agree that alienating and dehumanizing voters can be counterproductive in a democracy. If democrats want to win next time, they have to persuade some portion of non-voting and republican-voting Americans to vote democrat instead. There are many methods of persuasion, though - and not all people are amenable to all forms of persuasion. No one likes to feel foolish, and surely some people who voted for Trump are feeling a bit foolish right now. Pointing out ironic examples like this guy who supported Trump and is gradually learning to regret his decision might have some merit.




  • Canada alone might not win a trade war against the US. Good thing for us that Trump is on a streak for pissing off US allies. I really don’t care how bad Trump tries to make things in Canada, they are not going to get worse than they currently are in the states. Do you really think millions of Canadians would prefer school shootings to 25% tariffs? Will millions of Canadians trade in their health care and human rights for cheap iPhones? US can go fuck itself. Trump can go fuck his own face. I will die before I become a fucking American.



  • A lot of the bad stuff that happens on the internet is directly related to perceived anonymity. If you want to bully, harass, make bigoted statements, disseminate propaganda, or shill for a corporation, it’s better to be anonymous. If a country gives its citizens the right to free speech and reasonable protections for privacy, a non-anonymous internet is better. Besides, anonymity on the internet is an illusion for about 99% of internet users. All of the big social media companies know who you are - their whole business depends on the data they collect on you, and that data is worth much less if it can’t be associated with an individual. They also have heavy incentives to share that information with the government. Try making an ‘anonymous’ threat against your country’s leader and see if any law-enforcement types decide to visit you.