• Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    My hope would be that we can transition peacefully to a hybrid model with the rising power of unions, gradual emergence of worker cooperatives, and increased demand for socialized health care and affordable housing.

    However, I think it’s more likely that things will have to collapse first. Especially with violent accelerationist types doing their thing. Unfortunately, it’s far easier to destroy systems than it is to repair them.

    • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I have reservations about unions. While it does give employees bargaining power, it sometimes does it to a fault. We see this with police unions in the US as it stops bad apples from getting proper punishment, and as a result, they get slaps on the wrist. I imagine that it would be equally as hard to fire somebody in other industries like medicine unless there’s a 3rd party (like an arbitrator or court) enforcing these decisions.

      Also, without any legislation in the US, I’d argue that unions will stay incredibly difficult to form, and even if they do, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they can negotiate with companies fairly. Companies out there (I believe Dish is an example) have spent 10 years stalling negotiations with unions, and it’s all practically legal.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      My hope would be that we can transition peacefully to a hybrid model with the rising power of unions, gradual emergence of worker cooperatives, and increased demand for socialized health care and affordable housing.

      None of this has anything to do with capitalism tho.

      Like, capitalism can and should be the economic engine driving these positive outcomes.

      • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        I mean not really? Because currently capitalism as an economic engine is actively preventing these outcomes. And basically by design. How do you explain that?

        • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          A lot of capitalist countries have free healthcare. So how is capitalism preventing that?

          • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Because in those countries it was regulated enough?

            The question you need to answer is why countries like the US don’t and if you disagree that capitalism didn’t have anything to do with it

            • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              Well yes, regulation is often needed to ensure that markets remain free and the USA is a great example of how that can fail.

              • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                The USA is also a good example how the markets can get in the way of the regulation and of free markets. The players in the free market don’t really benefit from being in a free market. They have every incentive to change that.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    “Defeated” implies being stopped by an external force, I don’t see that happening.

    It will collapse under it’s own weight in less than a century.

  • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    It seems as if capitalism sows the seeds of its own destruction. Not saying I know a better way per se but its in there all the same

    Edit: to put it in Pokémon perspective: capitalism is Ghost type and its super-effective against Ghost type

      • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        Capitalism, minus a strong guiding hand as described by Adam Smith, invariably leads to monopolies, or near enough. When that happens, either through a single strong monopoly or a small group of companies, the market doesn’t work and price gouging rises. You don’t have to look further back than the past couple years at inflation. Every study I have seen blames inflation almost completely on price gouging and market failing to work for consumers. Think record prices (and corresponding record profits) of companies across the board. If you want specific examples, check out the long history of Walmart and the negative effects its stores have on local competition and local earnings. Or the profit taking of gas companies. Or super market chains. Or…

        People who love Capitalism always seem to have missed high school history/econ and have this ignorant belief that laissez-faire is the best. Even though proven to be shitty. This belief in trickle down bullshit has resulted in 50 trillion dollars going from the bottom 90% to the top 1%. If that’s not capitalism destroying itself, I’m not sure what else to say.

        Or as Leonard Cohen sang so succinctly,“The poor stay poor, the rich get rich / that’s how it goes / everybody knows.”

        • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Is that capitalism destroying itself tho? I mean in a purist way, what you describe is capitalism changing so it does do something but what it ends up in is called late stage capitalism so did it really destroy itself or merely “evolved”? Yes in that stage it is worse for 99.99% of people compared to before but maybe that’s somewhat intended? And most importantly is that stage (more) stable or not.

          • Untitled4774@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            The vacuum can only suck up crumbs for so long until it runs out of crumbs.

            In other words, the greedy aren’t letting capitalism be the cycle system it needs to be, it’s a funnel.

            Either the crumbs will run out and the system will collapse, or people won’t take kindly to giving up their final crumbs and overpower the vacuum.

            Any one sane person is only a few missed meals away from acting insane. Any sane society is only a few missed meals from falling apart.

            • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              Yes but you really didn’t answer my question. It’s also debatable if we’re anywhere near that point at this stage

              • Untitled4774@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                If a structure is stealing bolts from its lower structure to further amass a larger structure on top it is going to collapse.

                A closed system designed to be a cycle that doesn’t return anything to the bottom will eventually collapse.

                If rain never comes to replenish the earth the clouds are only stuck with each other to canibalize.

      • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        The concept of enshittification.

        Granted, the concept applies specifically to platforms, but the idea is basically what capitalism is:

        • Be good to everyone
        • Be good to suppliers (supply-side economics)
        • Be good to shareholders and, subsequently, alienate both users and suppliers of content. The platform collapses.

        Late-stage capitalism is when shareholder wealth is maximized at the expense everyone else. So you have 3 billionaires with 50% of the wealth of all humanity or something, the middle class squeezed into oblivion, and a roiling undercurrent of pure fucking rage ready to sever heads like watermelons from a vine.

        • PlzGivHugs@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Is there actually any record of this destroying the capitalist system though? To my knowledge, every time this happens, its just replaced with more extreme and violent capitalism.

            • nintendiator@feddit.cl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              That’s not how it works. Nor it is useful, since a more extreme and more violent capitalism causes more, worse victims until it, in your terms, “collapses” - that is, is replaced by an even worse capitalism.

  • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    Why would you want it defeated?

    The most successful and happiest countries in the world are the Nordic countries, which are capitalist economies.

    • TheMurphy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think it’s because people see capitalism as one thing, while in reality they are implemented very differently.

      The nordics are not successful only on their capitalism. It’s because it is regulated, and because the money is distributed more fair than in other countries.

  • OpenPassageways@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Gens Y, X, Z, and soon A are being taught by conservatives that capitalism can’t be reformed, and therefore are digging capitalism’s grave with their own hands.

    You want reasonable restrictions on firearms? Conservatives say that can’t be done because of the 2nd amendment. They’re basically teaching gens Z and A that the 2nd amendment needs to be eliminated and those generations might actually have the numbers to do it eventually.

    It will be the same with capitalism. You want reasonable regulations and taxation to reign in the abuses of the rich and corporations? Conservatives say you can’t do that because the free market must be supreme.

    Conservatives will dig the grave of capitalism by continuing to fight against any reforms that would make capitalism more livable for future generations.

  • nintendiator@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    There’s currently no external forces that can defeat capitalism.

    We have to do it on our own. Eat the rich. Guillotine the techno-feudal lords. Confiscate and coöperativize their infrastructure resources.

  • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I think society will collapse first, likely due to mass displacement and migration due to climate disasters which will make more people willing to accept fascism.

  • SheerDumbLuck@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    When we start talking to each other again without paid influence.

    The troubles facing us all, middle class and below, are the same troubles. We need to practice working together locally to build something bigger before major movements are likely to work out. How do we rebuild community nonprofit hubs?

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s unlikely to happen without some kind of apocalyptic event. Communist societies works very, very well on a small scale; you can have communes with maybe as many as a few hundred people, because everyone is connected to everyone else. That all falls apart when you start talking about anything bigger. Capitalist societies don’t seem to need that direct relationship in order to function.

    I think that the best we can hope for is some kind of reform that blends parts of capitalism with socialism, and sharply constrains that rights of the capitalist class.

    I don’t think that we’ll even get that though; I think we’ll get Cyberpunk 2077.

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    Capitalism is still preached in Usa, like socialism is preached in North Korea.

    But capitalism is dead and gone.

    Today we have neo-feudalism, or some call it techno-feudalism.

  • qooqie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    When 99% or less of the population can’t work or make any money. What I mean by this is the economy mainly driven by robots/rudimentary AI. The top 1% will be angry and try to keep it as is, but as history has taught us humans really like the guillotine in such situations

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        9 months ago

        Ironically enough, Elon Musk - posterboy of “rich fuckheads” - actually does live in proximity to his workers. I read a while back that he’d sold off all his houses and lived in the same rental properties that his on-site engineers used.

        • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          I read that he sold his real estate and was staying in a place owned by another billionaire while looking for a place. That was a couple of years ago, I don’t really follow that fuckhead.

  • DarkGamer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Through abundance it will defeat itself by working too well. Approaching full automation the only way for capitalism to survive is via UBI, otherwise there will be no consumer markets. When we have enough productive capacity and sufficient UBI that everyone is wealthy without having to work, a society like the Federation from Star Trek becomes possible. When everyone has enough wealth that hoarding it becomes meaningless, we might achieve something like a communist society.

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      “Hoarding” or controlling resources will be always meaningful. There is limited amount of accessible matter, and even if all basic needs of every human is satisfied, people have inspirations to do things, including BIG things, and for that they need resources. The only way we might have something like communist society is if AI takes control, and no human is controlling anything of a value. Kind of like a “Culture” series of books by M. Banks. Or if we go completely virtual, but even then, the computation resource is of the value…