submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/microblogmemes
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 26 points 2 months ago

While I agree with the sentiment, saying that it's been hundreds of years in the making is just wrong. If anything, labor rights are at historic highs, and that's been centuries in the making.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago

both are correct. As long as their has been expropriation of labour there has been struggle for liberation, also enclosure and forced market participation has been a project of centuries.

As in all things it's push and pull. If you want to learn more read about enclosure of the Commons and at least the bits of Debt: the first 5000 years that deal with imposing currency.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

I often think of this famous line to remember that there’s been a whole lot of improvement: “he must a king, he doesn’t have shit all over him.”

[-] Phegan 6 points 2 months ago

Capitalism is just feudalism with a glow up

[-] Drivebyhaiku 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Technically feudalism is a separate system of resource extraction. Someone who owns the land basically just takes a percentage cut of your goods or earnings for being on their space and leaves you to do whatever you want as long as you survive .

So arguably being something like a content creator on a platform or working for uber is closer to feudalism than capitalism.

Capitalism is more the complicated system of landholders wanting to profit from selling, holding, leasing and developing land for profit as an investment good forcing people to perpetually earn to afford to live as individual family units.

It's a subtle distinction.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

Capitalism is supposed to put the worker at the top

It doesn’t because the people with capital make decisions

Christianity straight up opposes wealth, but it doesn’t play out that way because people with wealth make the decisions

It’s the same for every system/ideology because a power vacuum will always be filled

[-] hark 3 points 2 months ago

Capitalism is supposed to put the worker at the top

No it isn't. It's supposed to put capital at the top. It's right in the name!

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

It’s supposed to take money away from the owning class (lords) and give it to the working class (craftsmen)

The idea is that no matter what you do, you are paid based on hours put into it

[-] hark 0 points 2 months ago

So then billionaires are just simply putting in more hours than everyone else, is that it?

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Refer to my first comment for why that’s not the case

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

You are assuming someone always has to be in power over someone else. Historically most communities where run without anyone in charge, but with direct democracies. It just became harder with bigger cities, because it was harder to communicate with everyone else. Perhaps we can change that with the Internet.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Historically you are incorrect

If you don’t put power over someone else then someone comes in and puts it over you

The vehicle for change was just how easily that other person can get to you

You can go back to bronze age kings to demonstrate how what you said was false in all of recorded history

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

There is a good yt channel talking about egalitarian societies in prehistory called What is Politics

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

If you want to go far enough back that we use theory

Then we can say prehistoric nomadic humans still had fights with other clans and territorial disputes because our genetic ancestors (chimps/monkeys/apes) also have those

And if you were there with a gun, would you be able to dominate them? If so then you are able to put power over people without a power structure

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Territorial disputes where only common after agriculture in humans, because territory wasn't as important before as mutual aid.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

You can point to territorial disputes between non-agrarian humans to suggest otherwise

Hunting grounds and shelter were more important than mutual aid

You don’t even need to use humans, you can use other primates

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

it is not just farming land that is valuable, sometimes there are good fishing spots and etc in scarce regions. However those are far rarer situations and usually there is plenty of food for everyone, but hard times also happen and then most animals and humans practice mutual aid. There is a good book about it, by Kropotkin, called Mutual aid. It isn't long, I listened to the audio book.

[-] Windex007 1 points 2 months ago

Most animals practice mutual aid?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Yes, there is a good book about it, called "Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution".

this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
1271 points (93.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

4317 readers
1970 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.


  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.

Related communities:

founded 10 months ago