I really hate that phrase "marketplace of ideas" what the fuck even is that?
no dude we have super objective measures by which we can measure which ideas are more betterer, and they're always the ones that people like. trust me bro
Every single spherical frictionless homo economicus on the planet will get 13 PhDs in philosophy, sociology, polisci, and history and examine every idea proposed from first principles and then vote (with their dollar) on which one is the objective best without personal bias or consideration of their material conditions.
Also, none of these spherical rational actors are influenced by propaganda or logical fallacies of any kind.
I mean I could legitimately see this being taken seriously by some fucking libertarian or something. They are that dumb.
“I WILL GO BEYOND THE BOUNDS OF COMPREHENSIBLE IDEOLOGIES TO NOT HAVE TO CONSIDER COMMUNISM “
It could be more effective than we may think, libertarians don't seem like the brightest sparks to begin with.
And it's not like Ancaps actually have a coherent philosophy and worldview in the first place.
honestly we have to do this more. fuck up the definition of capitalism like they fucked up the definition of socialism.
Isn't that just the gig economy? Everyone is their own boss, and everyone is an entrepreneur, and everyone gets to choose their bosses (apps) who compete in the marketplace.
When it first started trending on twitter it just came off as a forced-meme by libertarians pretending to be leftists pretending to re-brand socialism as super-capitalism to trick capitalists.
Just fucking do socialism, people. The name isn't what's holding it up.
"for all those who work" gotta love that eugenics vibe. Work will set you free indeed.
And there is a legitimate conversation to be had about how to best motivate people to do difficult/crucial jobs under socialism. For example, being a doctor is extremely difficult and also extremely crucial. If no one ever had to worry about themselves or their children being hungry or homeless, many people would still become doctors because they want to help others, but some folks who would choose to become doctors under capitalism might choose to do something else.
i feel that this issue resolves itself. i will never take seriously the concern that a significant group of humans will just neglect things which need to be done. that has never been true of any society in the history of this world, it simply is not how our species operates. if we need food, we will acquire food. if we need more medical experts, people will become medical experts. if we need to build a dam, we will build a dam. someone will do it.
just because capitalism has disrupted this process does not mean it won't be true once we dismantle capitalism
i will never take seriously the concern that a significant group of humans will just neglect things which need to be done.
I mean, look at how we "handled" Covid. A huge percentage of the population couldn't be fucked to do bare-minimum stuff like not going to superspreader events. I think we're a lot less responsible than you describe. You can also look at rural America, where there are shortages of all sorts of services, and get a picture of how willing people are to spontaneously provide these things.
Capitalism is surely to blame for a good chunk of this -- if you had your basic needs guaranteed, a lot more people would work in rural America and provide those services -- but I don't think it's entirely to blame. A lot of people generally follow the path of least resistance, and humans have a lot of psychological tools for rationalizing away the suffering of others. None of these are insurmountable problems, but I don't think we can count on them resolving themselves.
This is absolutely a base/superstructure problem created by the capitalist mode of production. Changing the mode of production will in turn change the superstructure of our society and resolve a lot of these contradictions.
For example, being a doctor is extremely difficult and also extremely crucial. If no one ever had to worry about themselves or their children being hungry or homeless, many people would still become doctors because they want to help others, but some folks who would choose to become doctors under capitalism might choose to do something else.
Education and training that's not commodified seems to more than cancel that out, going off how the doctors-per-capita ratio is much higher in socialist states. Attempts at complete wage flattening in the USSR were counter-productive in general, but their primary effect seems to have been indirectly encouraging corruption and semi-legal capitalist activity, not discouraging participation in education or difficult fields like medicine.
Even in Cuba, where the highest income comes from jobs related to the tourist industry, they have the highest number of doctors per capita out of any country.
Strikes me more as a "from each according to their ability" vibe.
Guess I disagree with him there. No one should go hungry just because I don't find them useful.
Agreed. We have enough food now, we will always have enough food. No one should ever go hungry, for any reason.
Lenin obviously made exceptions for the old and young. I think we can make more and dream bigger.
Isn't this supposed to be rebranding socialism to appeal to libertarians?
Doesn't this imply that the means of production are owned by the workers?
Cooperative ownership of firms, while still maintaining Capitalism, means that workers will now be able to Democratically vote on who to fire during recessions, and will be able to collectively decide to reduce wages to maintains their firms competitiveness. It's arguably more democratic and less cruel, but it's not socialism.
Here's a decent article on Mondragon Co-Op , and why it's experience shows that worker ownership cannot succeed on Capitalism's terms.
The negative impact of such inequalities on social solidarity was made painfully evident in the former Yugoslavia, which had implemented full market socialism. The uneven distribution of historic and geographic advantages meant that inequalities across firms were also expressed regionally.
yeah, it's probably not fair to blame the entirety of the Yugoslav wars on market socialism, but it definitely exacerbated the issue.
The only thing that it implies is that managers are voted for, which doesn’t make it socialism.
Yeah, it's just poking fun at the idea. If you check the out on social media you'll see they have more like this.
I think the idea is something along the lines of:
- Point out the obvious flaws in capitalism
- Label your alternative "real" capitalism, because Americans are so brainpoisoned by a century of anticommunism that calling them insufficiently capitalist can be wielded against them
Ah yes, and I'm sure that everyone is going to be entirely willing to give up their clout and influence to begin again on completely even footing in the marketplace of ideas
as icky as i feel market socialism is and as easy as it would be for the capitalists to be reborn phoenix style in such a system it may be the best way to ease the chuds and other americans into socialist thinking.
Capitalism is when you wear a hat, and the more hats there are the capitalister it is.
