lolbertarians are some of the dumbest people on earth.

okay, let’s say it is “crony capitalism run by the state” (he doesn’t mean state capitalism, he doesn’t know what that means)

what else can capitalism become, especially without extremely strict regulation and wealth/income caps- all things these people are against? and to the extent that the state has its hand in the economy, is it not ONLY to benefit corporations? they’re not regulating these companies or anything to any meaningful degree. so if the government is bad because they only serve big business, even in their own completely nonsensical analysis, doesnt that still make capitalism the problem?

  • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Capitalism is good when I, a mediocre white person, can make enough money to flip real estate on the side and make at least $350k per year and pay little to no capital gains tax and then buy a used snowmobile dealership

    Capitalism is crony capitalism when there’s a big financial and real estate sector run by billionaires who make it hard for me, a mediocre white person, to flip real estate on the side and also I have to pay capital gains tax meaning I am precarious in my position as a snowmobile dealership owner

  • BeamBrain [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    5 days ago

    Turns out libs are projecting when they say “Oh, communists just say that the USSR/China/etc. ‘weren’t real communism.’”

  • DragonBallZinn [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    5 days ago

    economically illiterate

    CHUDs “fucking love economics” the same way they accuse the left of “fucking loving science”.

    Everyone’s an anti-intellectual until it’s time to disregard economics.

    • quarrk [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      5 days ago

      Liberals love economics too. Except instead of “it’s simple really, let me explain to you the supply-demand curve” the liberals will say “let me explain why this program for Pell Grant recipients benefits you metaphysically although not actually, and here’s why you should love it”

  • NuraShiny [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    5 days ago

    If only good, selfless people become our overlords via accumulating all capital, it will all work out completely and utterly fine. What? What do you mean people die and are replaced by their failchildren?

    Even the very most charitable way to think about it breaks down after one generation. You buffoons. You idiots.

  • oscardejarjayes [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 days ago

    From Wikipedia: “The initial use of the term “capitalism” in its modern sense is attributed to Louis Blanc in 1850 … and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1861”. Two socialists, not describing an ideal, but rather describing reality (or, in other words, capitalism just is crony state capitlism).

  • if you remove all the onerous regulations around child slavery, landlordism, privately owned security services, human trafficking, heavy arms manufacturing, human experimentation, organ harvest, and sexual exploitation… crony corporatism will cease to exist and the bright, radiant future of market fundamentalism will emerge.

  • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    5 days ago

    They’re just too philosophically illiterate to understand how things develop and change over time.

  • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 days ago

    Liberals who think like this imply they do not comprehend the centrality of contract, property, corporate, copyright and patent laws to a capitalist society or that these concepts are so hopelessly abstract in their head that it might as well have the same relevance as mentioning bowling or botany

    Just wtf do they think a state is? These people have no idea what capitalism is

    • godlessworm [comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 days ago

      they think “the state” is just someone standing next to a money printer with a list of DEI based welfare programs to send bags of cash to (when they aren’t making oppressive age of consent laws)

  • GoodGuyWithACat [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    5 days ago

    He’s right that most people don’t hate capitalism (even though they should).

    They hate the effects that capitalism has on their lives and have no coherent model to explain it.

  • WoodScientist [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    5 days ago

    People can’t recognize the difference between capitalism and commerce. You don’t need to completely end private property and free enterprise in order to end capitalism. Hell, even the Soviet Union at times found keeping some small private businesses around made a lot of sense.

    I don’t want a world where people can’t work for themselves, provide services directly to others, etc. Every restaurant and bar doesn’t need to be run by a central planning committee. But giant conglomerates that control the employment of tens of thousands? Maybe that’s the kind of thing the private market shouldn’t be running. We can let people operate their own modest independent businesses without also letting Walmart exist. We can let people earn enough modest profit from the fruits of their labor to make starting new businesses worthwhile, without also allowing people to hoard such vast fortunes that they become geopolitically dangerous. We can have commerce without capitalism. I want a world where people can work for themselves without having to work for someone else or for the government. That doesn’t mean I want a world where you can become a billionaire by playing labor arbitrage with the hard work of thousands of other human beings. We can let people own their own homes without also allowing industrial-scale landlording.

    Commerce and capitalism are not the same thing. We can have commerce without capitalism. Commerce existed long, long before capitalism, and it will exist long after capitalism has been relegated to the history books.

    • XxFemboy_Stalin_420_69xX [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      We can let people operate their own modest independent businesses without also letting Walmart exist. We can let people earn enough modest profit from the fruits of their labor to make starting new businesses worthwhile, without also allowing people to hoard such vast fortunes that they become geopolitically dangerous. We can have commerce without capitalism.

      wow i couldn’t disagree more. beheading small business tyrants for their crimes against the workers is going to be the best part of the revolution and it’d be better not to have one at all if we’re going to let “modest independent businesses” continue to earn “modest profit” afterwards

    • godlessworm [comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      out of curiosity, how would employment look in a situation like that? if there’s a small privately owned business, is the owner expected to do all of the work themselves? does the entire amount of profit get divided evenly among the owner and all workers? if not then i have to disagree, because then you have exploitation happening. one person earning more than everybody else in other words means everybody else takes a paycut to pay for that one person to have more than everyone else. and even on a small scale that’s a very slippery slope and it comes with social implications that are in my opinion detrimental to society as well as bad for each person’s individual mental development in that it reinforces that relationship and normalizes the exploitation and competitive mindset at its core. there’s nothing inherently wrong with competition but society needs to be set up in a way that socializes people into a mindset of cooperation rather than competition. as the dialectics are in motion and socialism becomes more and more realized this should be the natural result. the same idea applies to what happens when private ownership is allowed. what that looks like evolves over time and people adapt to those conditions and we end up where we are now.