this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
1274 points (97.4% liked)

linuxmemes

21273 readers
1695 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Not just great, but eventually necessary. Capitalism can't outlast automation, increasingly automated production will eventually result in mass job loss and stagnation unless directed by society as a whole. It's important to ensure this transition goes well and we learn from transitions of the past to not repeat their mistakes.

    [–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Basically we're looking at the choice between Star Trek and Mad Max.

    [–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

    Pretty much, though Star Trek may look wildly different. There are many "good" outcomes, but none of them will be a continuation of Capitalism.

    [–] fosforus@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

    So which is capitalism? The world of Star Trek contains technology that has brought humanity (and other species) to a state of extreme abundance. They generate food from energy and they have almost infinite energy. The situation is so much better than the real world that probably any system would work just fine. One of the biggest reasons why we need to have economic systems is scarcity.

    [–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    I thought it was obvious I meant Mad Max as the current future.

    [–] fosforus@sopuli.xyz 0 points 11 months ago

    Looking at current and previous implementations of communism, it's not at all clear. They resemble Mad Max more than Star Trek.

    [–] fosforus@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

    Capitalism can’t outlast automation

    That's what they thought of factorization as well, but it outlasted it just fine. Same thing will happen with more advanced forms of automation, but there will be growing pains certainly.

    [–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    Capitalism is undeniably declining, though. Production is through the roof, but wages have stagnated with respect to that. Factorization in the sense of industrialization was never seen to go against Capitalism, rather, with the rise of factories came the rise in Capitalism.

    Unless I'm misunderstanding your point, of course.

    Additionally, the fact that one prediction was wrong does not necessitate that all predictions are wrong.

    [–] fosforus@sopuli.xyz -3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

    The amount of people living in extreme poverty was 94% in 1820. In 1981, it was 44.3%. In 2015, 9.6%. This effect is entirely due to Capitalism. Perhaps wages in the West have stagnated because people in other countries deserve those better wages more? Just a hunch, no data to back that one up, except these statistics.

    This incredible success in saving people from horrible conditions might not continue, but the recent history has been pretty great.

    [–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    Development did, not Capitalism. The countries that developed the most in the 1900s were the ones rejecting Capitalism in favor of some form of Socialism.

    Do you think that people get richer when a group of people decide they have no rights of ownership and one person owns everything, or do you acknowledge that democracy and decentralization are good?

    [–] fosforus@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

    Do you think that people get richer when a group of people decide they have no rights of ownership and one person owns everything, or do you acknowledge that democracy and decentralization are good?

    False dichotomy. Those are obviously not the actual two options.

    [–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

    They are.

    To argue for Capitalism over Socialism, you must reject the idea of democratizing control of productuon in favor of dictatorial control. You can whitewash it into "meritocracy," and pretend that ownership is a mystical concept that chooses those with the highest competency, but ultimately Capitalism is a rejection of Worker Control, and thus an affirmation of control in the hands of the few.

    Similarly, to believe that this dictatorial control is worth it, you typically must also believe that growth is either non-existant if the Workers direct it, or pales in comparison to when Capitalists control production.

    Therefore, you are rejecting the concepts of decentralization and democratization of production in favor of the "good men" theory, putting all your chips on Capitalists either being good people or being replaced by better Capitalists without input from the Workers.

    Did I deliberately highlight the flaws of your thinking without putting the kid gloves on? Yes, and I won't apologize for it, as the claims are logically a necessity to hold your beliefs.

    [–] frostinger@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    There are socialist laws that govern and assist the poor everywhere in the world, so I would attribute the claim that "fewer people living in poverty" to socialism rather than capitalism; aside from that, those figures entirely depend on how poverty is defined.