There's NO FREE MARKET in capitalism, socialism is STUPID, communism is for ALIENS
All of this debate does not include dictatorship in itself. But please do not forget capitalism can also lead to tyranny - Hitler says hi.
Communism's equality — Leave it to the Borgs
In a perfect and thoroughly developed communist society, there is no government, currency or social ranks. We are all equals. This is utopic. Great, but literally impossible.
If you take it to the letter, equality does suck. But you're supposed to understand it, not take it to the letter. Let's say I'm in a communist country. We're equals, right? But if a new video game is available, there won't be a copy for each person. Because not everybody likes video games. Only people who like it would get it. If you didn't get a copy because you didn't like video games, would you not still feel equal anyway? In this same manner, if someone needs chemotherapy, they are going to get it, but you are not if you don't need it. But hey, you'll still also feel equal even if you don't get unnecessary chemotherapy, right?
Individual needs are sated according to each individual. In communism, we are still not clones, and we would not be treated like clones. It's just that each person would get what they need and whatever extras they want as long as there are enough resources available. People still need to share. That's the key part of it all: everyone needs to live according to communism by their own free will. This would create a perfect society.
Even though each individual is born different from one another, it would work in this utopia. Just think of “making the best out of everyone's best to make the best world ever!” That's communism. It requires deep and honest effort from every single person.
But humans are very, very flawed. In a society where good will, cooperation and great virtue is expected from every single person, our individualist nature and different personalities would make it so some people who don't agree with others eventually sabotage the system in order to centralize power in their own hands. Therefore, at least as far as humans are concerned, communism is impossible.
Example of species that have successfully developed communism: the flora of forests and Star Trek's alien race, the Borg. Humans do not share a collective consciousness (as if we were all connected, and we always agreed), therefore communism is literally impossible for us.
Socialism is a bad idea, but only because of bad people
You can't just get elected and proceed into changing everything. There is no money in communism and power is not centralized, which is the exact opposite of what capitalism offers. This means socialism is a method of transitioning from capitalism to communism. So by definition, it's stupid, since the reason it exists is to create the literally impossible, as explained in the above section of this article.
Still, socialism can be used as a tool to remove corruption. Because it centralizes power, this allows a well-intended person or group who got elected to start doing the good things they want. They get to arrest ill-intended politicians, close down or expropriate completely corrupted companies, and do things tyrant enterprises wouldn't like happening in third world countries, such as investing in public health and education. But socialism is not worth the risk.
The problem is how this political system is supposed to centralize power before completely decentralizing it. It's a double-edged blade. If an ill-intended person starts a socialist government, or even worse, it gets elected into what was previously a good socialist government, they can just usurp power to themselves. Just like in any other leadership system, the outcome depends on a leader's intentions and their skill set.
So even if a socialist government is started by a well-intended group and manages to mostly succeed, there is a chance an ill-intended group will take over and start heavily abusing the system. In this age of digital manipulation of the masses, this is not worth the risk. Left-wing politics should be outright banned. This was not the case before we got to the age of globalization, but we've got to adapt.
You are fooled into thinking capitalism offers free market
Meritocracy in capitalism would be good if it were mandatory. But it's not. You get to be born as a very dumb and ill-intended person but still maintain your heritage without trouble. Luck is the defining factor. You might get rewarded for contributing to society if you do more than the average person, but you actually get penalties for not being better than average. Simply meeting the expectations leads to an average life only if you are lucky enough pre-birth (location and family heritage). If you are very unlucky, you have to struggle a lot, and I mean a lot, to even stand a chance.
The average person wanting to live an average life still needs a great chunk of good luck in order to be born in a mid-high class family, which is actually where a decent life standard begins, including health and financial stability. This also includes access to education and opportunities. Only then will they be able to maintain these things.
The above-average person (highly intelligent and skilled from birth) needs only a little less luck. If they are born into a poor family, they might still be able to conquer a decent life standard, granted they are offered some decent growth opportunities. Remember, being offered something is not up exclusively to oneself. But they will have to work very hard to get it regardless. An average person born with this kind of luck is unlikely to achieve a decent life standard.
In contrast, the below-average person will only ever get a chance if they are already born into a very nice heritage. Frederick Christ Trump was clever, but his son is dumb as a bag of rocks. Yet, you see Donald as USA's president. Because his heritage and the people behind him got his back.
As you can see, meritocracy does not truly exist in capitalism. It allows people in power to stay in power. Unfortunately, there is no way out of it. Just like in every other species on Earth, behavior in almost every individual in our species agrees with general biology. We have not yet evolved out of it, so no system that can overtake capitalism would offer peace to all of us. Remember, communism (and whatever other alternative you can think of) is for plants and aliens.
If you still inquire about free market, it's an illusion because people in power can just buy, sabotage or even kill their competition. Just like they avoid taxes through legal loopholes and get away with hideous crimes thanks to being able to threaten and/or bribe whoever wants to fight their abuse. Almost nobody wants to die to stop children around the world being molested, and the old boys in power understand this.
You are free to set up your little shop. But if truly big people take notice of you, you're either selling out to them or getting sabotaged, to say the least. Yes, it's very easy to sabotage smaller businesses. Big people can use their existing diverse contacts to their advantage. “Oh, hey, you were going to sell materials to those guys? I'll buy it instead for twice as much. For the next few months.” Their control results in less technological innovation and quality of life to everyone. But capitalism is still our least bad option.
I agree, especially with the RAPID & ever-increasing growth of anarcho-capitalism/voluntaryism. It's winning over lots of people around the world who have such horrific histories with state socialism/communism, that they don't want to lean into the libertarian version either.
Bakunin and Marx went round and round about it, and because of it (largely - it was their most important disagreement) got Bakunin kicked out of the International. The idea that you can "eliminate capitalism" (centralize all power in the state), and then the state is going to give up that power, is the most utopian idea there is.
Have you read/listened to the book Markets not Capitalism?
I focus a lot of my energy on uniting those on the libertarian (as opposed to the authoritarian) end of things.
I've just read this http://voluntaryist.com/fundamentals/introduction.html and I have to say voluntaryism sounds ridiculous. It's pretty much what it already is today except people have less rights. It sounds like an elabored NAP (Non-agressive principle) which incredibly favors those who already own more than others. It seems so silly. It's as if a rich old man wrote this while throwing a tantrum after somebody told him to do something he didn't want to do, like not obstructing traffic.
I've also read Anarcho-capitalism on the wiki and... Okay, so libertarians think a stateless society is good. Okay. No. Just look at my country. Brazil was (accidentally) colonized as an anarcho-capitalist society.
Portugal acted like it literally owned this land. You could say there was a "government" but it really acted as nothing but an extraction and exportation company. Natives were hired, black people were "imported" and used as slaves... All of a sudden, most of our natural resources are gone and we're left with what resembles a shitty, third world version of USA.
Needless to say, things started getting better for everyone around here after we got independence. What Brazil is today, while compared to the United States, is proof of how humans do need governance. From the get-go. Of course, I'm also talking about innovation and market growth, not just the people's quality of life.
Portugal was the government. You can't have colonies without having statism first. The only difference between organized crime and government is the story told, and the people playing along with it.
Well, I guess you can say portugal was the government. Because in libertarianism, those who own less will be subject to the will of those who own more. Whoever has more private property than anyone else becomes the government.
Yeah, Portugal got here to profit, not colonize. It was a whole different deal than what happened in North America.
Okay, just tell me one thing. Keeping in mind most people (the non-stoic) would abuse each other to maintain or even expand their private property and that there would be no entity to stop this, do you really think this would not result in war? Like, realistically, considering how humans really are.
"How humans really are" - which version of "human nature" are you subscribing to?
In reality, the only way that "humans are" is adaptive. Everything else is adaptation to their life & environment.
The less trauma, indoctrination, and authoritarianism in childhood, the less violence, neurosis, and sociopathy in adulthood.
Equal parts genetics and environment.
Ignorance is bliss, suffering humanizes. A less comfortable life gravitates a little bit more towards arrogance due to more opportunities of craving the empathy of others to help with their unjust situation. Of course, the education system could help with this, but it won't, specially in today's age of political correctness.
A friend of mine is 100% certain they would be arrogant and self-entitled if they were rich. But since she comes from a poor background, she more easily understands how other people's behaviors might be due to life struggles of their own instead of simply ill intended. You could say someone you know would be bad - or good - regardless of upbringing. Yes, that's just how genetics also plays a role, not just the environment.
We are individuals, not a collective. We will never share the same way of thinking. "A rotten apple spoils the barrel." What I'm saying is... Jerks exist. Jerks will exist. Period. The danger jerks represent isn't often taken seriously. This CEO is an example of someone who's only had greater success because he doesn't take this matter lightly: https://ideas.ted.com/the-3-questions-this-ceo-uses-to-weed-out-jerks/
There will always be two sides: people who own a lot more stuff and everyone else. Nowadays, a state serves the purpose of being the middleman for the rich and the poor. This is important because, like POTUS Donald portrays, the rich can be very stupid, which results in technological advancement delays.
You need all three elements if you don't want humans to go back to the feudal age. The state, private property and capitalism. The three of them automatically keep an eye on each other so no single side can overtake everything. Otherwise there won't be balance, order, and therefore, progress.
Congratulations @felipejoys! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPDo not miss the last post from @hivebuzz: