the antagonists of stardew valley are joja, and the protagonists are you and (arguably) pierre, two small business owners. which are still capitalists (owners of capital), even tho they work.
stardew valley is a game which criticizes big capital (it shows how it alienates you from work, both in the beginning and with the villagers who work there, selling the town over to joja closes the community center definitively, they threaten to make pierre’s go out of business, their shitty products are polluting the water…), but also celebrates small capital with great naivety (you as the small business owner are responsible for repairing many things around town, including especially the community center, and you, pierre and harvey as small business owners are never criticized by the game in the same way joja is)
which is fine, it’s a game, it’s meant to be fun, of course the player has the most agency. it probably wouldn’t be as fun if you were a proletarian farm worker with little-to-no agency.
but that doesn’t make it anti-capitalist. stardew valley is a libertarian-right game, it’s the game that says “the problem isn’t capitalism, it’s corporatism!”
you’re conflating capitalism with a market economy, and implying anything with the latter is an example of the former. that’s not only incorrect, but reductive.
Dude. The protag owns a farm outright lol. A huge fucking farm. That is capital.
That is not personal property, that isn’t land the community allocates to them so long as they turn it to productive ends. You own a farm outright, soley, and all proceeds from it are yours to do with entirely as you wish.
You are conflating means of production and the way of distributing products.
I’ve personally considered a thing that requires multiple people to operate it takes it out of the realm of personal property, or at least that seemed like an easy way to categorize things (though I haven’t given it tremendous thought, so I’m sure there are many edge cases where that doesn’t neatly fit). So like, assuming communism was already implemented successfully, if someone wanted to take up the hobby of blacksmithing and there wasn’t a life threatening critical shortage of the materials that make up an anvil (which there probably wouldn’t be), then a single Anvil, despite it being able to produce things, could still be that person’s personal property to do with as they please (though you could also argue that in denser areas a collective workshop could be set up instead).
Assuming there isn’t an active famine or food shortage, then I also wouldn’t see the harm in someone farming an amount of land they can effectively cultivate themselves without industrial sized equipment (which would be better served in a collective farming situation), such as if they live in a rural area. For more dense areas like cities, then It’d probably make more sense for any urban farming to be larger community gardens, but people could still probably have personal gardens on balconies or back yards if they happen to have one.
I think Caroline in Stardew has a small greenhouse attached to her home where she grows various things, I think that would pretty safely be considered personal property.
But assuming the main Stardew Farm is indeed the only source of local sustenance to the town, then yeah I’d agree it probably shouldn’t be personal property.
the antagonists of stardew valley are joja, and the protagonists are you and (arguably) pierre, two small business owners. which are still capitalists (owners of capital), even tho they work.
stardew valley is a game which criticizes big capital (it shows how it alienates you from work, both in the beginning and with the villagers who work there, selling the town over to joja closes the community center definitively, they threaten to make pierre’s go out of business, their shitty products are polluting the water…), but also celebrates small capital with great naivety (you as the small business owner are responsible for repairing many things around town, including especially the community center, and you, pierre and harvey as small business owners are never criticized by the game in the same way joja is)
which is fine, it’s a game, it’s meant to be fun, of course the player has the most agency. it probably wouldn’t be as fun if you were a proletarian farm worker with little-to-no agency.
but that doesn’t make it anti-capitalist. stardew valley is a libertarian-right game, it’s the game that says “the problem isn’t capitalism, it’s corporatism!”
you’re conflating capitalism with a market economy, and implying anything with the latter is an example of the former. that’s not only incorrect, but reductive.
What are you even defining as capital? who’s definition are you using?
Dude. The protag owns a farm outright lol. A huge fucking farm. That is capital.
That is not personal property, that isn’t land the community allocates to them so long as they turn it to productive ends. You own a farm outright, soley, and all proceeds from it are yours to do with entirely as you wish.
You are conflating means of production and the way of distributing products.
Couldn’t the farm be considered personal property since it’s small enough to be farmed by the player alone?
And in multiplayer, the profits from the farm can either be in one collective pile, or split evenly, making it more of a worker owned cooperative.
No, it’s a means of production.
At what size do you reckon it would be personal?
deleted by creator
I’ve personally considered a thing that requires multiple people to operate it takes it out of the realm of personal property, or at least that seemed like an easy way to categorize things (though I haven’t given it tremendous thought, so I’m sure there are many edge cases where that doesn’t neatly fit). So like, assuming communism was already implemented successfully, if someone wanted to take up the hobby of blacksmithing and there wasn’t a life threatening critical shortage of the materials that make up an anvil (which there probably wouldn’t be), then a single Anvil, despite it being able to produce things, could still be that person’s personal property to do with as they please (though you could also argue that in denser areas a collective workshop could be set up instead).
Assuming there isn’t an active famine or food shortage, then I also wouldn’t see the harm in someone farming an amount of land they can effectively cultivate themselves without industrial sized equipment (which would be better served in a collective farming situation), such as if they live in a rural area. For more dense areas like cities, then It’d probably make more sense for any urban farming to be larger community gardens, but people could still probably have personal gardens on balconies or back yards if they happen to have one.
I think Caroline in Stardew has a small greenhouse attached to her home where she grows various things, I think that would pretty safely be considered personal property.
But assuming the main Stardew Farm is indeed the only source of local sustenance to the town, then yeah I’d agree it probably shouldn’t be personal property.
the key difference is if posession can turn into power.