Stuart on Warpcast

Content pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Tay Zonday pfp

This is a valid sentiment. What Harvard Business School and CNBC call “Capitalism” IS in crisis. That being said— My take has always been that calling our present economy “Capitalism” is like calling Fig Newtons “cookies.” I know what a cookie is. That’s not a cookie. Today’s economy is theocratic witchcraft retconned onto John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith, John Locke and Hegel as a placating cosplay. None of those philosophers imagined corporate personhood. None of them imagined private bankers printing public money. None of them imagined fractional reserve banking. None of them imagined fiat trading and manipulation. We cannot surrender to Ivy League goofballs and the CATO institute lying about their own mythos. THEY are the actual anti-capitalists. We have endless receipts. Many functionally humanistic economic policies align with a non-hypocritical read of “capitalist” philosophy. I REJECT the master’s semantics in dismantling the master’s house. Semantic lies melt to truth.

8 replies

2 recasts

31 reactions

Stuart pfp

Interesting take. I certainly think capitalism has gotten worse and worse as it becomes fascism, but to me that seems like an inevitability. As Marx predicted, capitalism means accumulation of resources and power which then leads to fascism so they can maintain that power. I don't see any possible way for capitalism to exist without this happening. So I am very curious what your definition of capitalism is, and what your ideal form of it would take. Appreciate the discussion :) ✌️

2 replies

0 recast

6 reactions

Leeward Bound pfp

i agree with the innevitability here - capital yields power, power accumulates capital, power and capital accumulate centrally. moreover, we compensate our politicians like SHIT (i earn nearly as much as POTUS in a good year), which only increases the buying power of lobbyists. i've helped write a bill that got introduced to congress with ~$50k in "donations" to our senator; it's just too cheap, its unreal. is there an argument here for taking politicians capital away entirely? make it like joining a convent - you voluntarily give up all your wordly assets. in exchange US govt provides free housing, 9 wives, a yacht, etc - whatever they're doing now, lets let them do it, make it *attractive*. but they can't own anything ever. no stocks, no bank accounts, no cash bribes. i see it as an extension of Yangs '16 "Freedom Bux" proposal (giving every american $100 to donate to any politician) - by drowning out the power of corporate lobbyists to purchase our politicians, we can begin to take back our democracy.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

🍞communist.degen🎩 pfp

🍞communist.degen🎩

Was just about to say the same. What we’re witnessing seems to me like the natural progression of capitalism in decay. We’re in the Late Stage of Neoliberalism and will be entering the Hyper Late Stage of Technocratic Corporate Feudalism but all that tracks naturally with chasing falling rates of profit

0 reply

0 recast

4 reactions