Hi all,

I’m seeing a lot of hate for capitalism here, and I’m wondering why that is and what the rationale behind it is. I’m pretty pro-capitalism myself, so I want to see the logic on the other side of the fence.

If this isn’t the right forum for a political/economic discussion-- I’m happy to take this somewhere else.

Cheers!

  • AnarchoYeasty@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalism has pretty much one defining feature. The private ownership of capital goods. Worth also repeating that anti capitalists are opposed to private property (of capital goods) and not personal property (your house your car your toothbrush)

    • J Lou@mastodon.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This understanding rejects all criticism of capitalism based on its denial of workers’ control as not a critique of capitalism per se. It takes the position that an economy where all firms are worker coops is capitalist, which is strange due to labor’s special role in controlling all firms.

      Is the capitalist’s appropriation of 100% of the product of the workers’ labor not a defining aspect of capitalism?

      It also makes climate critiques not of capitalism. Those involve private property in land

      • AnarchoYeasty@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think it rejects any of those things. When capital goods are privately owned then by definition the workers do not have autonomy or control. If the workers of a coop own the capital goods I would consider that collective ownership of capital goods. Not quite public ownership (you still have to be in the group to access it) but not private either.

        Climate critiques are definitely in the realm of capitalism. Your house and your land you use to live on is personal property. But if you are running a factory or a farm for other reasons than for your own use then that then ceases to be personal property and falls into private property which is capitalism.

        I’ve not seen a better difference between capitalism and socialism than capitalism is private ownership of capital goods while socialism is the collective or public ownership of capital goods. Social democrats are not socialist because they are not addressing the ownership of capital goods. They just share the profits via state provided safety nets and benefits.

        This understanding is also inclusive of the different forms that socialism can take. State (🤮), Market, or Gift/Library/Communism. I’m open to other opinions on it if someone has critique or a better definition. This is just the one that’s made the most sense to me over the last 7 years of me being a leftist

        • J Lou@mastodon.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The employment contract not private property gives the employer the legal right to the whole product and control rights to the firm.

          Why do you believe that privately owned capital goods imply a lack of workers’ control? A worker coop remains a coop even if a third party rents them a factory.

          Oh, you include private land ownership.

          Modern social democrats are capitalist of course.

          Socialists aren’t the only anti-capitalists. “Market socialism” is not socialism.
          I cannot fit more in a toot