Is Capitalism really the best system we can strive for? I've

File: orig zog president 106.jpg (120KB, 600x460px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 600x460px

America does not have capitalism.

The USA has fascism (definition: the merger of state and corporate power)

There is no excuse for billion dollar elections.

No election should have funding that exceeds the value of after tax income earned by the the person running for the job.

It's major problems is advertising, mixing with politics, and (unreasonable) regulations.

>>136360178
you sound so fucking stupid

>>136359688
A proper government would have regulations in place that acts as a checks and balance. What we have now (and for previous decades) is a group of politicians that sell themselves to NGOs and lobbyists. They act on the behalf of corporate interests and give their power to them for some shekels. It's been out of control for a while.

File: Brook.jpg (42KB, 1500x949px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1500x949px

democracy of 20th century failed hard

lets get back to capitalism of 1800s usa
total gov spend 1% of GDP
thats 130B now
and no regualtion of economy
defense only expenditure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNHjl6HkqAw

>>136359688
The best system we can strive for is Real Communism

>>136359688
Capitalism is the most efficient system, so yes, it is good.

>>136362117
but you have not tried
real fascism
unregulated capitalism
global white monarchy
geoism
yet

>>136362492
and most moral system

remember democracy is communism and based on A robbing B to give unearned to C
destroying the production that makes life comfy

>>136359688

Obvious bait but...

I remember once I shot a man in the back in a mudhole village in Afghanistan. He was running away with a rifle in his hand and I shot him. Hit him right in the small of his back. I went over an hour later and do you know what I found in his shirt? A copy of the Communist Manifesto. No sh*t. It was ancient and written in Cyrillic, probably Russian. It had notes in it in their gay arab script. He had been reading it probably for years.

A good little leftist in a mudhole village in Afghanistan. The only person I shot in my entire tour, pretty sure. He was running away, and when he died he sh*t himself. He had foam on his face, so he probably took a while to die. It was striking to me that he kept a book written by people who tried to conquer his country and murder him, and

That's what Leftists are. Cowards and weaklings who worship an ideology that would murder them in an instant if it could. They run away as soon as they are met with force and they die in agony. AGONY. For nothing. For no reason except that they thought, like you, that GOOD LITTLE LEFTISTS can defeat Right Wing Men.

And good lord, were they wrong. Because Right Wing Men are the only kind of men--there are no Left Wing Men. They don't exist. A Leftist is a craven weakling addicted to victimhood by definition and they are not men, they're animals

File: ancap.png (586KB, 650x1350px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 650x1350px

>>136359688
>it does not care about pollution and environmental hazards
That's not true, we just have the state protecting corporations from liability for environmental damages

>it is inefficient and wastes far more natural resources than necessary
It is literally the most efficient system ever invented, at least in terms of getting people what they want, when they want it, at a cost they are willing to bear.

>it empowers blind hedonism and degeneracy at the cost of culture, traditions and social cohesion
I would argue the state and democracy has done more to erode those than capitalism ever has.

>it produces millions of tons of useless and/or low-quality junk
Which people want.

>makes banks and interest rates possible, thus inevitably driving society into bottomless debt
The banking system is currently fundamentally broken, but if we got rid of the Federal Reserve this wouldn't be a problem.

>it cannot work in a globalized society (outresourcing, offshoring, sweatshops...)
It works even better in a globalized society. Those sweatshops that people always complain about are always in the over-regulated countries, where big government has driven out all the competition and so the people are left with nothing and are willing to work for pennies just to survive.

>it prioritizes personal gain over the wellbeing of workers and society
It allows every man to work for his own personal gain. You aren't held responsible for billions of other people you've never met, you only need to work for your own prosperity, and by cooperating with other people who are looking out for their own self-interest you both stand to prosper from your work, despite not particularly caring about each other.

>>136359688
>the intellectually superior rule over the inferior
whats not to like

Every system created by man will eventually fail.
Capitalism is modern slavery.

>>136363156
>working by choice is slavery

No. The only slave master controlling you is your stomach.

>>136363156
How so? You mean people establishing successful corporations and having less well-paid people work for them that are less educated and less trained?

>>136359688
Probably not, but it's the best system we have. There don't seem to be any better solutions popping up right now.

Economic systems are ad-hoc. We've allowed ourselves to become beholden to material systems, like capitalism or communism, without the greater philosophical and social thought, which economics ought to reinforce and serve. We've become beholden to materialism.

>>136362825
>It is literally the most efficient system ever invented, at least in terms of getting people what they want, when they want it
>Which people want
>You aren't held responsible for billions of other people you've never met
See, you haven't considered one simple thing: maybe most people aren't smart enough to know what is good for them and others, and always letting them do whatever they want in the moment will eventually get everyone killed.
You live in a society, not on an isolated asteroid floating through space. You ARE responsible for other people.

>>it is inefficient and wastes far more natural resources than necessary

Whoever wants to make profit usually try to minimize waste as much as they can to increase profits.

>it prioritizes personal gain over the wellbeing of workers and society (people who have no other choices available are easily exploited)

It prioritizes personal gain, sure. But how do they gain? They gain by providing services and products that other people want.

If you put a system that prioritizes someone else's objective rather than your own, you end up with some sort of dictatorship that takes away your freedom to do what you want

File: monopoly monster.jpg (1MB, 2048x1289px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1289px

>>136359688
No, capitalism is by no means perfect but elements of capitalism and socialism can be combined to build a successful and prosperous system that will last a long time. Thinly regulated capitalism with anti-monopoly/anti-trust legislation is optimal in my opinion.
Money is power and in a purely capitalistic society a significant portion of money can easily get into the wrong hands and this is exactly what has happened in western society, the jews and their banking tycoon have accumulated enough wealth that manipulate politics in our countries and do so with bad intentions. A system that brings them and people like them to heel is necessary because if not for them, someone else would be doing the same thing. Therefore a system that destroys trusts and monopolies while preserving personal economic freedom is most desirable and certainly better than the purest form of other capitalism or socialism.

>>136363435
Im talking about third world countries.
Rich countries/companies can do whatever they like to the small ones.
Example, after the Yugo wars, German companies bought everything of value here, and the entire profit goes to Germany, and nobody can do anything about it. Madlene Albright is owner of the 90% coal mines in Kosovo.
Im talking about the bigger picture here, not the individual ones, who has the bigger paycheck.

>>136364014
democracy in 20th century shows how war and shit follow messing with capitalism

back to 1800s unregulated capitalism
total gov spending 1% of GDP
ended slavery
no regulations
USA went from woods to no1 in world

how did that happen?

no regulation!! thats how

The only that lifts people out of poverty and the only one that may lead to post-scarcity society. Even Marx near the end of his life seemed to realize its merits but he thought that it will evolve into this creepy cult-like society. It didn't. Enjoy capitalism because there's nothing else.

Environmentalism in particular is an nth-order good.
Once people are rich enough they want to buy tons of environmentalism.
Until then, they don't want to buy any environmentalism, they have higher priority goods to acquire first.
A truly capitalist society is likely to go through occasional spasms of ecological devastation interspersed with long stretches of excellent stewardship.
That's before you consider the possibility of bringing back absolute property at a level that allows you to sue polluters for lowering your land value.
Such a stricture would relegate polluting industrial places to the most isolated environments, where they can get consensus from all affected property owners.
Such a situation might force the need for space elevators just to have somewhere to put noxious industries where they won't bring down hell from angry neighbors.

>>136364284
All you need to do to understand why unregulated capitalism doesn't work too well is study the industrial revolution. Back when every member of a family had to work 12 hours a day (including the children) to barely get by.
And war isn't caused by messing with capitalism, the US has been at war with someone somewhere for the vast majority of its history. War just happens, it's a necessary evil.

>>136364014
You just descibed our current state and its a fyckin disaster. Take your socialism and die

>>136364808
you misunderstand

capitalsim worked wonderfully

environemtn is good due to industry

air conditioning and heating

capitalsim is why billions are alive

democracy ruined everything with huge failure in 20th century

youtube alex epstein center for industrial progress on environment

capitalism is best for environment

government are biggest polluters

democracy of 20th century endless war debt and skimpy engineering progress

remember engineer not science is important

capitalsim ended child labor and salvery

vast majority were raised up out of grinding poverty of socialism/democracy

>>136364285
>implying it hasnt

>>136364014
>the jews and their banking tycoon have accumulated enough wealth that manipulate politics in our countries and do so with bad intentions.
We have a lack of transparency in government, business, and banking. Once we fix that I believe it'll make it a stronger system and address the corruption.

>>136359688
capitalism also destroys nature, replaces white people and puts everything under kike control

>>136363709
That's quite the premisse you got there.
The price system is the one that allows people to make good choices about what they consume. It's decentralized information, basically, as it is impossible to know everything about the market, scarcity and demand.
This is why your argument is bullshit, you would have to say that you somehow know how to make better use of the money than the members of an ever changing chaotic system.
And believe, government have been trying to take upon this task since the last century through central banking. They failed miserably ever since, causing crashes, inflation and distortion of the price system, and thus, of the best way people are able to make decision for themselves regarding comsuption.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr2fexY-utY

>maybe most people aren't smart enough to know what is good for them and others, and always letting them do whatever they want in the moment will eventually get everyone killed

See above, also you would have to argue that people are capable to act against themselves and not improve their lifes. I will already warn you, though, that trying to do so will be a perfomatic contradiction.

File: gtfo.gif (362KB, 300x166px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 300x166px

>>136363709
>maybe most people aren't smart enough to know what is good for them and others, and always letting them do whatever they want in the moment will eventually get everyone killed.
So far all attempts to have the government decide what people are allowed to have has resulted in massive suffering. I believe in letting people make their own decisions towards improving their welfare, and if they make the wrong decision, so be it, I shouldn't be punished for the poor decisions of others.

>>136366379
no thats socialism aka democracy

it is the best system, humankind was poor as shit until industrial revolution. As a whole we've never been better. Yes you commie there's still poor people but that doesn't mean we should go full Venezuela.

>>136362492
>>136362584

ya'll are some dumb motherfuckers

>>136362623
you still pissed off about Vietnam, old man?

>>136362825
your argument falls apart when you realize that state is controlled by capitalists

>>136364284
>1800s
>ended slavery

no, slavery wasn't "ended" until after a civil war and then after that there were white racists that captured africans and forced them to work to death in alabama gulag mines
then, after that, people still lived in poverty in all the urban centers of the country

>USA when to no1 in world
>no regulations

you mean exploitation

>>136365270
>spewing industrial grade bullshit

>capitalism ended child labor and slavery

NOPE. you're thinking of abolitionists and socialists

File: minimum.png (462KB, 948x949px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 948x949px

>>136359688
BAIT THREAD BAIT THREAD
You know the drill folks. Sage, redpill, and leave.

>>136359688
I judge systems by quality of life alone. And so far even the poorest people in America live like kangz compared the lowest class under any other system. And yes communism has classes.

File: tread.gif (1MB, 457x340px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 457x340px

>>136371064
The state is controlled by capitalists because we've increased the power of the state, and thus have made it profitable for capitalists to bribe and collude with the government to increase regulations which cut down competition.

>>136362825
>>it does not care about pollution and environmental hazards
>That's not true, we just have the state protecting corporations from liability for environmental damage

I thought you capitalist retards are anti-regulation?

Recently I've been thinking about the perspective of 'Capitalism has done it's job and it's time to move on.' I don't need a better phone or a faster car, I would much rather have a population of more conscious people. Is it possible to make that trade-off by just investing more in education and teaching people how to raise a kid? All while encouraging critical thinking, no bullshit ideologies attached. Maybe it's an oversimplification but I think with capitalism humans kind of built themselves a world they can't sustain for very long and we should make changes before it's too late.

>>136362936
>the people born at the top rule over the people born at the bottom
Here i fixed it for you

>>136359688
The system to replace our current one will be composed of elements from every political ideology and some elements we cannot see right now.

File: snek.png (160KB, 1456x819px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1456x819px

>>136372131
You're confusing liability for regulation. If a factory fills the air on my property with smog, or pollutes my water source with their refuse, I should be able to sue that business for harming me and my property. However, so often these businesses are granted protection by the state through laws that limit the liability they have.

File: image.jpg (67KB, 476x417px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 476x417px

>>136364808
>war just happens
War happens in a capitalistic society because there is a profit motive for war.

Defense contractors pour billions into our politicians to get them to support every act of military intervention/regime change so that they can make more money.
Raytheon, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, GE, all they see is dollar signs when we send our naive young men overseas.

>>136367105
I'm starting to believe in this more every day. Democracy? In the 21st century... What a joke, honestly. For someone in the right position it would be ridiculously easy (because of technology and the very divided and dumb population) to have their way with people/laws/cash flow. Fucking insane the state of things right now.

File: image.jpg (155KB, 506x674px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 506x674px

>>136368967
There has always been a ruling elite and a subservient underclass since pre-history.
Think back to the 1200s: we had kings, queens, aristocracy, and the serfs. The impoverished masses who lived to work in the fields so that the aristocracy could sit on their ass and enjoy their luxury.
Please explain to me how our system today is any different.

>>136372661
>>136372661
>If a factory fills the air on my property with smog, or pollutes my water source with their refuse, I should be able to sue that business for harming me and my property
This is not a functional and sustainable system. What happens if some people pollute their own lands and damage them irreparably to cut on costs, use that extra profit to buy more land over the competition and repeat the cycle again and again, until there are close to no inhabitable lands left and the environmental hazards keep spreading? "Suing" them won't solve shit at that point.

>>136372661
Yet our current administration is working to repeal the clean water/clean air acts because HURR IT HURTS INDUSTRY TO RESPONSIBLY EXPEL WASTE.

>>136372661
Also dirty water and smog doesnt adhere to property lines lmfao

File: miia.png (70KB, 994x1044px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 994x1044px

>>136373298
>What happens if some people pollute their own lands and damage them irreparably to cut on costs
They would have a very difficult time doing so without polluting others property. They'd have to avoid polluting the air or water, since it would be near impossible to contain the pollution to within only their property. Deforestation and improper garbage disposal within their own property could be possible, albeit short sighted. Of course, they can't buy other property to exploit if those people aren't willing to sell.

File: liberty.jpg (33KB, 600x398px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x398px

>>136373410
>dirty water and smog doesnt adhere to property lines
Exactly, so good luck keeping it out of other people's property.

>>136359688
Great job, you've highlighted some of the flaws of Capitalism. It's still the best system come up with so far. It is literally millions of years ahead of any other economic system in terms of basic quality of life and opportunity for the most common of men.

>>136372047
>because we've increased the power of the state

capitalists did that. lol if the state was empowered to protect poor people, we'd be in a different fucking economy. holy shit you're stupid

>>136374270
>it's still the best system

it literally isn't

>>136359688
Because governments are known for not wasting resources.

I really do wish anti-capitalists would practice what they preach and actually research then boycott companies that abuse the system, rather than buying their products and bitching about companies.

File: snake.jpg (53KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 640x960px

>>136374491
So we are in agreement? We need to decrease the power of the state, yes?

>>136360178
>There is no excuse for billion dollar elections.

You realize Trump was the first candidate in years to have the smallest number of donations, especially with inflation. Most money came from outside supporters, Trump ran pretty much on his own.

Also, DNC and RNC have nothing to do with the government.

>>136359688
And every other system failed to let people live, so i'd rather live in a not too good of a world and not starve to death

File: IMG_1291.jpg (171KB, 2048x1229px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 2048x1229px

>>136359688
That sounds like something a normie would say.

>>136375567
lol, this

>>136359688
Well obviously if a political ideology is completely one sided it wont do well, that's why the healthiest government type is a mix of (mostly) capitalism with some socialist aspects. For example, restrictions on how much pollution a company creates.

>>136359688
Hasn't this exact thread with OP's exact pic been posted before?

>>136370885
>y'all
Post your ebony tits you fat, disgusting BBW.

>>136376029
It would be surprising, since I wrote everything by hand... Unless you consider anyone who displays different opinions on /pol/ a shill.

File: communist countries versus capitalist countries GDP Europe.png (12KB, 380x246px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 380x246px

>>136372998
>Please explain to me how our system today is any different.
Social mobility and higher HDI.

Meritocracy, or the allowance for smart/talented people to rise to the top of society and acquire capital (power, resources), creates an efficient system where the smartest/most determined decide how resources are spent.

Gommunism is flawed in that it gives power to the retarded plebeian masses, who often don't have much ambition (or they would be capitalist entrepreneurs themselves), and only care about getting basic gibs. This is why gommunist countries are often shit-tier. Now, combine gommunism with a high population of niggers, and you have a recipe for disaster (see: Zimbabwe).

>>136359688
>>>it is inefficient and wastes far more natural resources than necessary
>it does not create products meant to last, but instead feeds people's tendency of wanting new stuff just for the sake of it
>it produces millions of tons of useless and/or low-quality junk
>makes profit possible at the expense of other people's health or resources (e.g. drugs, unfair competition, pharmaceutical industries, gambling...)
All systems does this capitalism does it less. Some people mistake success capitalism with is waste. i.e. has gross dometsic product to waste, same percentage of waste from larger GDP of bigger pile of waste, easy to see. Only way to not produce waste is to produce 0 (zero) GDP.

>>136359688
Literally all of these are merely a reflection of the current societal enlightenment level. The beauty of Capitalism is that any and all of these can and will change as consumers demand it. We're seeing the shift already with demands of cleaner and more humane and environmentally friendly foods and textiles, minimalism culture, etc.

The only exception is banking, which is the separate issue of using a private central bank issued fiat currency, which is obviously not desirable. Escaping this system was actually the prime motivation for the American revolution... but Jews are sneaky and we've been swindled back into it since 1913. And we all saw what happened to JFK when he challenged this system. Capitalism's not to blame.

>>136359688
Her Marx said you need a few states:

1. Rule of the aristocracy - creates a nation, defines borders, unites the people.
2. Rule of the merchants - creates wealth, builds factories, dams, roads, universities.
3. Rule of the workers - distribute the wealth created by merchants among the nation created by the aristocrats.

If you believe him, capitalism is meant to happen before socialism/communism.
This is a convenient way to explain why Russia/China/etc failed, they skipped step 2.
It can also be used to explain why modern governments increase taxes and social programs and so on, because we are moving from stage 2 to stage 3 in a perverted way.

>>136376834
China and Russia don't have factories?

>>136376977
China and Russia went from rule of aristocracy to rule of workers, without a capitalist phase, so they had to do turbo-capitalism and build a lot of wealth under the Communist Party totalitarian rule.

It sucked.

>>136376834
Makes sense. If you want to live by robbing people, the people you rob must have something of value to steal in the first place.

File: 31dAaWOs9cL._AC_UL320_SR210,320_[1].jpg (9KB, 210x320px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 210x320px

>>136359688
>it does not care about pollution and environmental hazards
This is one of the faults of the freemarket. It does not take into account the negative cost of pollution. One of the few, proper roles from government in the economy

>it is inefficient and wastes far more natural resources than necessary
False. The freemarket is the most efficient way to distribute scarce resources

>it does not create products meant to last, but instead feeds people's tendency of wanting new stuff just for the sake of it
Again, this is false. Many brands become known for their quality. One of the issues here is that technology evolves so rapidly, that it may not make sense to make something that lasts a long time which will become obsolete.

>it empowers blind hedonism and degeneracy at the cost of culture, traditions and social cohesion
Going to need a source on that

>it produces millions of tons of useless and/or low-quality junk
Low-quality? So what? In some cases that makes sense. Useless products are not created, at least not for long. If the items were truly useless, the companies would go out of business.

>makes profit possible at the expense of other people's health or resources (e.g. drugs, unfair competition, pharmaceutical industries, gambling...)
Unfair competition is not created by the free market. All of those issues you are referring to created by government interfering with the free market. Gambling is not solely at the expense of other people. It is merely a form of entertainment. The free market creates the most wealth as it is the most efficient way to distribute scare resources.

>>136376834
>Russia/China/etc failed,
From marxist point of view they failed because it was not real communism. No dictatorship for proletariat (only in propaganda leaflets). Pol Pot could have success but entire wold decided to shut down true communism fearing its success.
From capitalist POV they failed because Marx was wrong with his theories starting from teh core, labor theory of value.

File: 41I2EBr8I3L._SX328_BO1,204,203,200_[1].jpg (21KB, 330x499px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 330x499px

>>136377573
continued

>allows rich and successful people with agendas to easily control other people's lives by manipulating their thoughts and behaviours through product consumption
Not really. You are over estimating the power of advertising

>makes banks and interest rates possible, thus inevitably driving society into bottomless debt
Part of the problem is the government intervening with banks. Without government bailouts and interventions, banks would be forced to only loan to people on aggregate that would pay back their debts. Otherwise they would go out of business.

>it cannot work in a globalized society (outresourcing, offshoring, sweatshops...)
That's completely false. All of those things produce more wealth for all people in the world than what would happen without them. Look at comparative advantage, etc.

>it prioritizes personal gain over the wellbeing of workers and society (people who have no other choices available are easily exploited)
Exploited is a meaningless, Marxist buzzword. The free market generates the largest amount of wealth which in turn has led to the highest standards of leaving for countries with freer markets.

You need to read a book you stupid bastard.

>>136359688
>Is Capitalism really the best system we can strive for?
Capitalism is nature. Nothing beats nature. SO fuck yeah.

>>136377788
Capitalism is not nature. It took millenia to create systems of laws to allow for the free market to flourish (ie property rights, etc.)

>>136377579
>From marxist point of view they failed because it was not real communism.

And from a Marxist point of view it wasn't real communism, because they needed to simulate 200 years of capitalism that never happened in Russia.
They chose to do so under the dictatorship of the proletariat rule, with the state being the only capitalist.
Thats why USSR backed regimes in Africa or South America (and Asia partially) managed to build so much infrastructure and replace mud huts with commie blocks - they were getting millions of Russian money to simulate capitalism so they can theoretically move to communism later.
But then communism is horrible for army/defense, and NATO was sharpening the knives, so they stayed at the dictatorship stage until the project failed.

tl;dr Marx specifically said not to start shit in Russia, its too backwards, and that socialists should take Germany or France instead. They tried, and failed, in both states.

>>136377788
>Capitalism is nature.

wut
Mob Rule is nature, and Might is Right is nature.
Capitalism isn't, private property enforced by the state is super unnatural. Normally private property is only enforced by natural might, which is why lions end up eating the cheetah's kill.

>>136377631
>nazi flag
>defends capitalism
>You need to read a book you stupid bastard
Wew.

>>136378113
Don't blame him, nazis burned his books so he couldn't read.

File: Capitalism.jpg (19KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 450x450px

>>136359688
>it does not care
>it is inefficient
>it does not create
>it empowers
>it produces
"It" doesn't do anything - people do things. What do you even mean by Captialism? What is the difference between Capitalism and a free market?

>>136378069
>Mob Rule is nature, and Might is Right is nature.
State is pinnacle of mob rule.

>>136378265
Marx invented Capitalism to refer to a system where you need to have money in order to make money, thus the only people who can make money are those who had money left to them by their fathers, and they had by their fathers, etc, until you reach a point where money was seized with violence.
That is, the only way to make money is to have money, and the only way to originally come into money is violence. Such a system is Capitalism (via Marx).

Today Capitalism just means that private companies are the big business, rather than state companies.
So if private companies build bridges, sell planes, run universities and hospitals, you are in a "capitalist" country according to the modern colloquial use.

>>136378358
Not really, for example Germany today is accepting more immigrants than it would if it were mob rule.
And if the USA were mob rule, it would elect Clinton to be their warlord, since she got more individual YES votes than Trump.

Majority rule, or mob rule, doesn't exist in its clean form anywhere, its always part of some big sluggish state that has mechanisms to tell idiots that they don't really want what they say they want.

>>136359688
>>it does not care about pollution and environmental hazards
Implement some regulatory laws
>>it is inefficient and wastes far more natural resources than necessary
no
>>it does not create products meant to last, but instead feeds people's tendency of wanting new stuff just for the sake of it
not necessarily
>>it empowers blind hedonism and degeneracy at the cost of culture, traditions and social cohesion
not necessarily
>>it produces millions of tons of useless and/or low-quality junk
No
>>makes profit possible at the expense of other people's health or resources (e.g. drugs, unfair competition, pharmaceutical industries, gambling...)
that is called eugenics
>>allows rich and successful people with agendas to easily control other people's lives by manipulating their thoughts and behaviours through product consumption
so?
>>makes banks and interest rates possible, thus inevitably driving society into bottomless debt
no
>>it cannot work in a globalized society (outresourcing, offshoring, sweatshops...)
maybe
>>it prioritizes personal gain over the wellbeing of workers and society (people who have no other choices available are easily exploited)
start a union

>>136378555
Exactly right. In reality there is no real difference between "Capitalism" and a free market. The term was created in order to divide the populace and pit them against each other. Just like "proletariat" and "bourgeoisie".

>>136377788
what the fuck are you talking about?

>>136359688
>it does not care about pollution and environmental hazards

What are you even talking about. I stopped reading right there. If you have environmental issues, then that's where the government steps in, or you use the court system to file a lawsuit. How does that have anything to do with capitalism? Do you think the commies that turned one of the biggest lakes in the world(Aral Sea) into a fucking puddle cared more about the environment than those evil capitalists?

>it does not care about pollution and environmental hazards

Waah, the environment changes all the time, animals and plants that are resistant to pollution will replace them and we can get on with it.

>it is inefficient and wastes far more natural resources than necessary

I'm sure a business doesn't make money off of unneeded waste.

>it does not create products meant to last, but instead feeds people's tendency of wanting new stuff just for the sake of it

Buy the products that cost more then, instead of buying a bamboo cutting board for $5, get the granite slab for $30. No one is stopping you.

>it empowers blind hedonism and degeneracy at the cost of culture, traditions and social cohesion

>hedomism

seeking pleasure is bad?

>degeneracy

get a tattoo on your forehead and go ask your boss for a raise

>culture, traditions

your boss is making you renounce your heritage?

>social cohesion

being an antisocial faggot does not make a good employee

>it produces millions of tons of useless and/or low-quality junk

(1/2)

>>136378859
Natural competition and survival of the fittest. It's a thing. The free market simulates it.

don't buy the junk and it won't get made

>makes profit possible at the expense of other people's health or resources (e.g. drugs, unfair competition, pharmaceutical industries, gambling...)

It gives people more incentive to be healthy to avoid fucked up medical bills, and a lot of those expensive cures wouldn't even be around without a profit motive.

>gambling

don't go to a casino then, let the people who want to gamble gamble

>allows rich and successful people with agendas to easily control other people's lives by manipulating their thoughts and behaviours through product consumption

What? If you don't like adds, don't watch television and use ad block when surfing the web. No one is forcing products down your throat.

>makes banks and interest rates possible, thus inevitably driving society into bottomless debt

Don't get a credit card, spend within your means. No one is forcing you to get a loan.

>it cannot work in a globalized society (outresourcing, offshoring, sweatshops...)

Cheap labor is not new, if you can be replaced by a 6 year old in China, you need better skills.

>it prioritizes personal gain over the wellbeing of workers and society (people who have no other choices available are easily exploited)

They would be exploited worse under other systems.

(2/2)

>>136378800
Capital was already a term, capitalist was a person with capital, capitalism became the rule of people with capital.
So its not like he was a devil with a strategy to divide people, he just used common words to describe an idea.
Like if you said Idiocracy - rule of idiots.

Anyways, the "class war" was already a thing when Marx wrote, because of syndicalists and worker unions and so on. Workers were already getting shot at by the police for protesting in the UK when Marx started campaigning. He just invented the word, not the idea of class division.

>>136379113
That may be so, but calling an entire system "Capitalist" makes no sense. We have a free market. You can choose to run your business however you want. You can even choose to be non-profit. How exactly would that be considered "Capitalist"?

>>136360241
not an argument, and he's right

File: 1501557908508.png (125KB, 886x1322px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 886x1322px

>>136360178

Actually what we have is a lot closer to 'super-captialism'. Pic related.

File: 53454.jpg (3MB, 4817x3260px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4817x3260px

>>136378683
Refugees opposing mob has no natural might. Mob that has rules teh country. Enjoy your "might us right."

Corporatism vs Capitalism. Anyone care to shed light on the differences between the two?

>>136379905
Two buzzwords that mean very little in reality.

File: 1497627373025.png (305KB, 2550x3300px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 2550x3300px

Capitalism is degenerate and wrecks nations. End of story.

Communism lets people starve, its either that or nationalism, your choice

>>136359688
Your pic reminded me of the Coca Cola death squads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUb-PAnflqo

http://killercoke.org/

>>136380028
Freedom, asshole. The freedom to choose to do whatever I want with my culture, my land and my people. That is the American way, always has been.

>>136378069
>Mob Rule
is money nao. and rich means right.

>>136364014
A perfect statement. I can't understand how some americans could still cry SOCIALISM/COMMUNISM!!! at you, while personal freedom stays the same.
The problem is the way too powerful bank sector that plays with virtual money they themselfs created to affect the people living in their countries.

>>136359688
No, it's just not as bad as the others atm.

>>136377933
>Capitalism is not nature.
it is the closest thing to nature, because it evolved naturally. it wasn't created artificially like muh gommunism

>>136380888
It's Rule of Law - the state will defend your property because it's yours and you hold the contract proving your ownership, not because you have more money than someone else.

>>136378859
>what the fuck are you talking about?
this
>>136379034

File: IMG_2064.gif (2MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x270px

>>136360241
Idk I thought it was an interesting take on the idea of modern America. After all corporations do have a hand in government so it's almost some kind of reverse-fascism?
Besides you're the one who has nothing to offer the conversation so have a (you)

File: History_political_Philosophy.png (32KB, 747x732px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 747x732px

>>136380028
Fascism is a soft form of socialism.

>>136359688
free market capitalism is more efficient than any other system, the free market will always determine best efficiency

File: 16lfh3[1].jpg (113KB, 499x298px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 499x298px

>>136381122
only retard would actually believe this.

>>136378986
>>136379063
>Waah, the environment changes all the time, animals and plants that are resistant to pollution will replace them and we can get on with it.
Ok, good luck learning how to synthesize carbon monoxide and how to survive radiation.

>I'm sure a business doesn't make money off of unneeded waste.
When the resource to waste is cheap (e.g. water, electricity), no one cares.

>seeking pleasure is bad?
When it's destructive, yes.

>get a tattoo on your forehead and go ask your boss for a raise
I'd most likely get it if the boss was a degenerate too

>your boss is making you renounce your heritage?
By making me move to Vietnam or some other shithole in order to supervise the offshored company? Yes.

>being an antisocial faggot does not make a good employee
Not if you work in IT.

>don't buy the junk and it won't get made
Most people aren't that smart.

>It gives people more incentive to be healthy to avoid fucked up medical bills, and a lot of those expensive cures wouldn't even be around without a profit motive
See above.

>don't go to a casino then, let the people who want to gamble gamble
See above again.

>What? If you don't like adds, don't watch television and use ad block when surfing the web. No one is forcing products down your throat
It's not just about ads. See the social engineering made by the likes of Google and Facebook.

>Don't get a credit card, spend within your means. No one is forcing you to get a loan
Except for education and housing costs.

>Cheap labor is not new, if you can be replaced by a 6 year old in China, you need better skills
Different countries, different living costs. Anyway, the point was about poor people having to accept abusive and body-crushing jobs in order to survive and make Mr. Scholmo a couple more shekels.

>>136381413
Don't be jealous our country's laws are actually based.

>>136381095
>it is the closest thing to nature
The only thing that's nature is nature. Either something is natural or it isn't, there's no such thing as "more" natural - it's either natural or it's not.

Would I say capitalism is included in this? Yes, but I'd also say everything else humans have come up with is as humans are just another animal that is no more removed from nature than any other. Meaning communism is also natural, as is every ideology until we can find one that's of supernatural origin.

>>136381696
>The only thing that's nature is nature
I agree with the overall sentiment of what you are saying here, but be careful with that statement - some could argue that everything under the sun, man made or not, can be considered "natural".

>it is inefficient and wastes far more natural resources than necessary

You should see how the public sector operates. If you think companies are wasting resources, your local government agency wastes far more resources.

>>136381829
That's what I'm saying, humankind is just another outgrowth of nature. In terms of how "nature" is being used by the anons above there isn't a meaningful distinction between what is "natural" and what is man-made.

>>136362492
>>136362584
>best
>most moral
under full ancap, people like Soros wouldn't need to operate though a corrupt political system to try and sometimes get his way -- he'd have his own personal army that would straight up conquer and kill you if you didn't kneel and accept him as lord and master

File: aaa[1].jpg (48KB, 623x475px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 623x475px

>>136381653
kys

>>136382003
>
Re-read your post, understood.

Capatalism is a joke. If you want real wealth, we need to switch to sacred economics.

https://m.youtube.com/results?q=sacred+economics&sm=1

>>136362623
Shoots man in back and calls him a coward.

Makes sense I guess...

File: 5d182b4ba942b4955426173f78fcab61.jpg (15KB, 254x377px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 254x377px

>>136381122
That's what the state told us when we signed the treaties.

>>136382294
I enjoy your casinos - fine establishments, truly.

>>136359688
Capitalism is not the best system, but simply a natural system. Maybe one day we will come up with a better one.
I thought about it. Imagine your body. It works fine, but sometimes it needs treatment, in the same way capitalism needs regulations.

>>136359688
Well, it usually leads to corporatism, which we have now and is extremely cancerous

>>136382421
>in the same way capitalism needs regulations
Not real capitalism

>>136361984
It won't work as good as before because there is much more people now.

>>136381696
>Meaning communism is also natural
NO it is not it was/is MEMED hard. While capitalism evolved following the best interest of each individual or group.

>>136382661
Yes, real capitalism with 7billion people will destroy our planet in a century. Actually even our "not real" capitalism is doing it now.
Yet communism isnt the answer, at least not the mainstream one,

File: 4623970-7319986998-25658.png (512KB, 800x598px) Image search: [Google]

512KB, 800x598px

>>136382868

>>136382868
Natural =/= best though.

>>136359688
Capitalism affords you class mobility, true individual equality, and increases competition which promotes efficiency, innovation, and competitive prices.

Pure unregulated capitalism will do anything fro quarterly profits including murdering innocent people.
Completely regulated capitalism is not capitalism at all, it's socialism and will completely remove competition and efficiency.

The most successful system to date is balanced capitalism. Enough regulations to punish companies from fucking everyone over, but not so many that it completely destroys the ability to run a profitable business.
Not many people wants balance. crony capitalists want complete regulation, marxists and socialists want to continue regulating capitalism to fuck over business profitability so they may solve that problem with big government and more taxes.

Conservatism and Capitalism balance each other hand in hand. Conservative values uphold the OG successful system that made America so great.
It's under assault because America is under assault. So many have forgotten their roots including their culture, ideology, and to be engaged citizens that uphold their rights and combat anyone who seeks to oppress or destroy that system.

Fuck off. Everyone who thinks their is a better theoretical system has not lived in the real world. In a theoretical perfect world all systems are equal because all people would be perfect and all follow the rules and treat each other fairly. This does not happen in the real world, therefore the value of a system is it's ability to maintain balance even when powerful men strive to destroy that balance for personal gain. Anyone pushing against capitalism is pushing for the opportunity to create imbalance to oppress people and destroy the middle class creating a massive division between the rich from the poor.

>>136359688
>Is Capitalism really the best system we can strive for?
For the capitalists, of course. For everyone else. Well, who cares about their opinion in our time, right?

>>136359688
I'm just waiting for automation to kick off so socialism will work for once

>>136383155
That's an entirely different argument that I'm pretty sure you'd lose.

>>136382868
Are you even reading my posts? My point is that literally everything humans do is natural strictly speaking. Even memes are natural, humans are not external to nature.

>>136383209
>crony capitalists want complete regulation
complete deregulation*

>>136383242
It may work if we remove the stupidest 99.9%.

File: harry-potter-blam.jpg (26KB, 254x247px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 254x247px

>>136362520
He's a nigger, they haven't tried anything beyond mudhut anarchy yet.

>>136383255
Are you implying that nothing is wrong then? That both communism and capitalism are both somehow correct because they are both "natural", regardless of how they actually came about?

File: photo[1].jpg (148KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 900x900px

>>136383255
Communism in NOT natural. What is happening in Europe now is NOT natural. What is happening in the world also NOT natural.

There is a global scheming beyond our comprehension.

There is a war out there. Ye feel me nigga? And yeah pic is damn related.

>>136359688
>Is Capitalism really the best system we can strive for?

Georgist capitalism

The only thing capitalism needs is an effective VR peasantry simulator like the matrix, so that when people get out they actually fucking appreciate the billions of dollars of shit other people who don't give a shit about you maintain for you. So they stop pointing at a homeless drug addict and text "the system is broken!" on their unlimited plan Iphone 8+ XQ slim edition.

>>136383679
>nothing is wrong
Literally what?
Are you implying that because something is natural that this means it is good? Because that's retarded.

I'm not making any comment on what is good, I'm pointing out that the usage of "natural" in this context is pointless.

>>136362584
>and most moral system
taxation of land based on use and taxation of monopoly is the only moral way to tax

>>136383897
It is called drugs.

File: 1498422994382.png (31KB, 698x396px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 698x396px

>>136380426
>The freedom to choose to do whatever I want with my culture, my land and my people

And your people are choosing to dispose of their culture, destroy their land and genocide their people. Such a shame.

>>136383770
Since anything supernatural has not been proven to exist I will repeat myself, literally everything is natural. Even shadowy global conspiracies are natural.

>And yeah pic is damn related.
Aliens are most definitely natural.

>>136365270
>air conditioning and heating

we spend billions more than we need to on these just to keep the budget for it high, thats really bad and believe me I know bad and thats really really bad ok

>>136383255
No. Natural is defined as occurring naturally without man's intervention.
Trees existed before people planted them, therefore they originate from nature, i.e. natural.

A governmental or economic system did not originate from nature. It's a man made structure of rules and regulations.

>>136383679
>That both communism and capitalism are both somehow correct because they are both "natural"

Yeah also slavery, cannibalism, bestiality, pedophilia, trans-sexuality, faggotry, incest ...

File: Bolshevik Ben.png (541KB, 656x470px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 656x470px

>>136380426
>Freedom, asshole. The freedom to choose to do whatever I want with my culture, my land and my people. That is the American way, always has been.
All the more reason why America is a disease.

>>136383770
>Communism in NOT natural.
right, blame Solomon, the first communist

>>136384052
>Aliens are most definitely natural.

>demons
>natural

>>136384065
>No. Natural is defined as occurring naturally without man's intervention.
I will point out something I said earlier

> In terms of how "nature" is being used by the anons above there isn't a meaningful distinction between what is "natural" and what is man-made.
If we're to consider capitalism as natural, which I'm going to accept for the purpose of debate, then we must everything to be natural. It does not matter whether something developed sociologically from a previous system or if it was theorized in one lifetime it only exists because of human intervention in either case.

>>136384052
Natural is not a synonym for acceptable, good, or normal. Natural is a word that defines things that occur in or originate from nature.
Fucking retard.

>>136384434
I know, in fact I raised that exact point earlier.

>>136383920

>>136364285
>It didn't
It didn't?

>>136384143
of course. we're in /pol/ after all

>>136384536
Here is what you are doing. You are falling back on the argument that "everything is natural" because in that world there can be no right and wrong and therefore communism is considered "equal" to capitalism.

My original point, and why I said to you to be careful about using this argument is this: it doesn't matter if you think everything is natural or not - communism came about because of conspiracy and trickery, not because of the free choices of free men.

That is the difference between the "systems".

>>136384536
No, you are retarded and pretend that a government system was created by nature.
Get a dictionary or a thesaurus and get a different word, retard.

Anything that is man made is not natural by definition.

>>136384340
>If we're to consider capitalism as natural
It is not.

>which I'm going to accept for the purpose of debate
Convenient to support your blatantly wrong easily disprovable lie.

>then we must everything to be natural
Nothing man made is natural.

You are beyond help. You are actually the new age product of postmodernism.
nat·u·ral
ˈnaCH(ə)rəl/Submit
adjective
1.
existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind.
"carrots contain a natural antiseptic that fights bacteria"

>>136384868
I encourage you to read the linked post again because I've already said that something being natural does not mean that it is good.

I'm not defending communism right now, I'm attacking the Bulgarian anon's use of "natural".

>>136384904
I'll also direct you to a post I made earlier which itself cites another post I made earlier.

>>136384340

>>136382807
It would work if it was all white

>>136385305
You're being very belligerent and I don't understand why. I think it is because you like to use internet debates to boost your ego and so like to get into them as often as possible rather than enter them in good faith to dialectically consider your own views along with those of others.

>>which I'm going to accept for the purpose of debate
>Convenient to support your blatantly wrong easily disprovable lie.
It's okay if you don't believe me I'm not going to reply to you anyway.

>>136359688
A planned economy with good leadership, culture and modern computers is the ideal.

>>136385521
>I'm not defending communism right now, I'm attacking the Bulgarian anon's use of "natural".
Truly the most important aspect of the overall argument to focus on.

The value of a system is it's ability to maintain balance even when powerful men strive to destroy that balance for personal gain.
Capitalism with balanced regulations combined with Americas balance of power and Law create the most fair and balanced system to the individual the world has ever seen.

>>136386136
We prefer the bottom up approach, but to each his own.

>>136386277
He is a straight up filibuster. Check the flag, check the complete denial of a dictionary defined word.
It's nonsensical, it's disruptive, and it's pointless. He is a retard. He's probably been programmed to be a filibuster without even being aware of what he is doing because he is not self aware.

People like him do not care about having a discussion to discover or share the truth. People like him want to create an argument or conflict for no reason at all, and fabricate false evidence to support their baseless claims. A classic trait of leftists.

>>136386727
What's a bottom up approach?

>>136386912
Planned economy would be en example of a top down system - planned and designed by a small group at the top and then implemented for everyone else.

A bottom up approach would be something like a free market, where individuals make contracts that determine how business takes place in the economy.

They can both work.

>>136386912
Worker's democratic control of the MoP.

>>136387084
>A bottom up approach would be something like a free market, where individuals make contracts that determine how business takes place in the economy.
That's silly to think. Just look at the world today, at Capitalistic countries today. It's not at all from the bottom and up, it's rich individuals having power over the rest.
+ a super uneffective system

>>136387698
How so? I look around and see many countries that are a mix of both top down and bottom up. The US is an example: we have individuals and small businesses as well as large industry and government regulation, all in the same economy. We have both Capitalism and Socialism. Why? Because our actual economy is a free market.

The issues you are referring to have more to do with government corruption in reality, which is a problem in many countries right now. And yes, powerful, wealthy individuals have influence over government. But that seems to exist in any country and in any system, doesn't it?

>>136388074
Yes

And a planned economy is better in theory. I did not say anything else. It is the ideal.

>>136388074
>The issues you are referring to have more to do with government corruption in reality, which is a problem in many countries right now. And yes, powerful, wealthy individuals have influence over government. But that seems to exist in any country and in any system, doesn't it?
This is the thing about capitalism.

As long as there is money and commercial property there is capital accumulation and as long as there is capitalism it is only a matter of time until wealth becomes so concentrated at the top that control of the government by the wealthy is inescapable - as has happened in the USA.

File: Jacque_Fresco_with_Trend_Home.jpg (336KB, 794x978px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 794x978px

>>136388543
Resource based economy when?

>>136360178
This, although some of OP's reasons are still valid even in an actually capitalist society. We need government regulation to handle externalities.

>>136388612
Wrong. Wealth exists in any system. Destroying or redistributing wealth does not destroy or solve corruption.
Capitalism allows people to write their own paychecks and be truly self sufficient.

You cannot oppress someone if you cannot control them. It's much easier to oppress people when you give government absolute control over wealth distribution. Capitalism takes that power away from the government.

>>136359688
There are different flavors of capitalism, and the one that we have now is toxic. I'm a fan of free market capitalism, but given the number of licenses that are needed today for various professions, along with all of the regulations on everything, we do not have free markets.

All capitalism boils down to the enforcement of private property rights and the enforcement of private contractual obligations. Even those are starting to break down. The government took your property to bail out the TBTF banks with TARP, for example. That is not enforcing your property rights. If you want to get back to something akin to free market capitalism, you need to take away A LOT of the government's power, because right now, it picks winners and losers based on who financed who's campaign and a revolving door of regulators and industry insiders.

>>136389253
It's leftist bureaucracy created to destroy the free market. You have to fill out paperwork and get a permit just to be allowed to apply for an actual permit.
Fuck communist, fuck bureaucrats, and fuck globalists. They destroy everything worth anything.

File: costanza doge.jpg (18KB, 469x469px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 469x469px

>>136361984
>Ayn Rand Institute

>>136389206
True, but I'm not talking about wealth. I'm talking about money and commercial property, you can have wealth without having those institutions. I am not talking about redistributing wealth, I'm saying we have some legal institutions that ought to be abolished.

>Capitalism allows people to write their own paychecks and be truly self sufficient.
No it doesn't. The people who own commercial property write everyone's paychecks and it is them who everyone is is dependent on. In order to live we must sell our labour to these people, we cannot live truly self-sufficiently - no one can. Even the propertied folks are dependent on the labour of the proletariat, more so than the reverse is true actually.

> You cannot oppress someone if you cannot control them. It's much easier to oppress people when you give government absolute control over wealth distribution. Capitalism takes that power away from the government.
But I want to oppress people. I think we need an empowered dictatorship of the proletariat to oppress Jews, non-whites and the bourgeoisie out of existence so we can build the best possible society.

>>136362623
ebin pasta

>>136371551
>And so far even the poorest people in America live like kangz compared the lowest class under any other system
The average Cuban has healthcare, unlike the average poor American. Think about that. People on a poor island country have something many Americans don't.

File: 1485723687755.jpg (347KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 1600x1200px

>>136359688
>it's another one of these threads where OP argues with his sock puppets and they conclude that communism's the best
OP is Jewish.

File: 306.jpg (29KB, 675x422px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 675x422px

>>136389253
>flavors of capitalism

>>136376481
>Gommunism is flawed in that it gives power to the retarded plebeian masses, who often don't have much ambition (or they would be capitalist entrepreneurs themselves), and only care about getting basic gibs. This is why gommunist countries are often shit-tier. Now, combine gommunism with a high population of niggers, and you have a recipe for disaster (see: Zimbabwe).
That's a ridiculously simplistic explanation for the problems in the USSR and its satellites.

>>136389744
>In order to live we must sell our labour to these people, we cannot live truly self-sufficiently - no one can.
Maybe you can't.

>But I want to oppress people. I think we need an empowered dictatorship of the proletariat to oppress Jews, non-whites and the bourgeoisie out of existence so we can build the best possible society.
You're either LARPing or retarded.

File: 1489711200207.jpg (288KB, 713x1024px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 713x1024px

>>136390544

>>136390544
>You're either LARPing or retarded.
Why not both?

File: Ayn_Rand.png (146KB, 491x366px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 491x366px

>>136389687

>>136390969
>But I want to oppress people.
You are right. I have no argument against that. Go for it, bro!