It can be. It is not inherently. That's why people think you're spreading propaganda (because you are).
Work Reform
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
Can you point me to a real first world developed country not run by a dictator that doesn't have capitalism? I need a reference to see that the alternative is better. Genuinely asking.
At anything bigger than city scale, it's pretty much impossible to implement any "real" alternative without fuckloads of work - we're talking 10+ years. Making a commune on a farm with ~15-ish people is easy (lots of hard work, but doable, there are historical examples of success), but even that group has to participate with the capitalist mother state whenever they need to get stuff they can't produce themselves. If the commune grows too much, it becomes impossible to keep things running smoothly because, well, there's just too many people involved now.
No, because we live in a global society where if you don't participate in global trade (especially with the USA in the past couple hundred years), your country will fail.
The USA has played a massive part in making communist experiments fail, most notibly the USSR.
The closest thing that the western world has is the nordic countries' social democracy, which is still capitalist by nature. They only implemented it, though due to communism being literally right around the corner (USSR)
I don’t think you can get to communism where there’s a relatively small group in power tasked with dividing the means of production. That power will be abused like oligarchs do now.
Yeah, I agree with that. Mass centralization is bad regardless of the situation IMO. We need collaboration instead.
I'm personally a fan of Prof Wolff's idea to force all corporations to surrender ownership to their workers, converting them into worker-owned coops. This would largely mitigate the ability for extreme wealth concentration to happen to begin with, especially if combined with other wealth-limiting regulations.
What would be the motivation then to even start a company/corporation if every time it happens, it is seized and given away?
The USSR didn't fail because of the USA....the fuck is with you tankies.
Democratic socialism is not unheard of...
Democratic socialism without the support of capitalism is truly and completely unheard of.
Capitalism is a tool, use it and beat it back into submission when it fails.
But don't worship it. Make it work for the nation, don't make the nation exist for the sake of the economy. This is what we do in America, and it's fucking wrong.
There is more than one alternative and some of them involve having capitalism...
Would that be propaganda in favor of Communism, who's every real world iteration so far has led to corruption, tyranny, and human rights abuse on a scale that would put Capitalism's to shame? Gwon you're making us blush. Oh, you talking about aspirational Communism, but not actual real life experienced Communism, lol. Yes, that's what we need, fairy tales of the world to come, like Christianity.
on a scale that would put Capitalism's to shame
You say that like capitalism isn't ongoing massacres and abuse in various forms all day, every day. As if the t-shirt you're probably wearing wasn't made by someone who's exploited in Bangladesh so that minimum wage Americans can still afford to buy it without forgoing food because they're purposely underpaid by service industry corporations. As though you're not also talking about some sort of aspirational capitalism where the "free market" actually exists and doesn't inevitably lead to corruption and tyranny...
Meanwhile, the richest man in the world is about to secure control over US government agencies because he gave the most money to the current president.
How dare you? Those billion dollar corpos are doing you a favor by paying a "just good enough" wages to allow you to eat.
You say that like capitalism isn’t ongoing massacres and abuse in various forms all day, every day.
OOhh, but it's not capitalism' fault!! It's just stuff happening that's totally unrelated to capitalism!!! <- answer I got to a similar discussion back in ~2014. Either that or "a few bad apples" when complaining about shitty companies.
corruption, tyranny, and human rights abuse on a scale that would put Capitalism's to shame?
Funny how you're describing capitalism and trying to pretend you're not.