this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
307 points (90.3% liked)

Showerthoughts

29863 readers
597 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

If they could somehow monetize breathing, they would

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

the systems is still inherently flawed and based on exploiting nature and people. Trying to make a system that is based on "infinite growth" adhere to the reality of our finite world is like telling a warrior society that they should start being peaceful

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes. Regulation helps to work around the problem but doesn't fix anything

[–] Lemmino -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

All systems dealing with human nature will inherently be flawed and require workarounds and bandaids.

There is no perfect system, but throughout human history, capitalism seems to have consistently resulted in technological growth and improved outcomes in terms of health, lifespan, creature-comforts, etc.

We tried communism - over 30 countries did - and the only ones left are China, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, and Laos. Interestingly, current and previous communist states got a lot closer to "regulating breathing" than anything we have today. It's not a good look as far as stable and free systems go.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nothing is perfect and there are infinite other options than capitalism or fake communism

[–] Lemmino -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

What are those options? Have they been trialed and errored?

If not, how do we actually know they will work in practice? For instance, communism was ideal on paper and fell apart in practice - no country was able to ever "truly" implement it. What other ideologies exist that could practically work? It's a bit premature in my opinion to call any of them "better than capitalism" when none have been tried.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

that's the thing, the same things were said about participatory goverment (democracy) and capitalism before they were implemented. Greece implemented participatory oligarchy and got conquered. Rome tried it out but resulted in dictatorship and fell apart. France wanted to abolish feudalism and ended in bloody tyranny... Reminds you of previous and current socialists experiments, doesn't it?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@[email protected] which systems are currently most viable options instead of capitalism or totalitarianism

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

There are several alternative systems to consider as alternatives to capitalism or totalitarianism. Here are a few examples:

  1. Socialism: Socialism aims to distribute resources and wealth more equally among members of society. It emphasizes collective ownership, democratic decision-making, and social justice.

  2. Communism: Communism envisions a classless and stateless society where all property is collectively owned. It advocates for the abolition of private property, emphasizing common ownership and the principle of "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs."

  3. Anarchism: Anarchism seeks to eliminate hierarchical structures and promote self-governance. It rejects the authority of the state and advocates for decentralized decision-making and voluntary cooperation among individuals and communities.

  4. Participatory Economics: Participatory Economics, also known as parecon, proposes an economic system based on self-managed worker and consumer cooperatives. It aims to ensure economic justice, workplace democracy, and balanced decision-making through participatory methods.

  5. Democratic Socialism: Democratic socialism combines elements of socialism and democracy. It advocates for democratic control of the means of production, a mixed economy, and a strong welfare state to ensure social equality and protection.

It's important to note that the viability and effectiveness of these systems can vary depending on the context, as their implementation and outcomes can be influenced by various factors. Additionally, there are several other alternative systems and models that offer different approaches to economic and political organization.


This response was generated by GPT 3.5 because you exhausted your daily limit for GPT-4.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Neither capitalism nor communism was tried either. Capitalism has taken over by force. Totalitarians have tried the same in the name of communism. Some actual communist attempts seem to be working when left unintervened by capitalists or authoritarians.

It's anyone guess which other system could be worth moving forward. Currently the only limiting thing seems to be the lack of a mindset to progress by a critical mass.

[–] Lemmino -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is disingenuous to say that communism has never been tried. It's been tried over 30 times, but it's never been able to live up to the ideal of "true" communism.

If your system falls apart as soon as people become greedy or power hungry, it's not a practical or stable system. You can't expect people to ignore those emotions and you definitely cannot bake that expectation into a system that needs to be resilient enough to sustain a society for centuries.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm pretty sure most can agree that communism has been tried in village and tribe sized societies through the history of humanity.

It's not the most honest claim to say that big authoritarian states like USSR or China have ever even tried it, and just used the name for marketing and support from gullible population.

Are places like Rojava and Kerala relevant examples? Maybe, I'm not an expert on the subject

Greed is an interesting topic. Capitalism creates and rewards greed and it's prominence in human psychology could be less in alternative systems.

[–] Lemmino 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree it works at village-scale, but in my opinion what we have seen is a failure of communism to scale to a nation with tens or hundreds of millions of people, and survive for decades at that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sounds like you'd want some kind of anarcho-communism where those smaller groups of people work together with other ones to form networks encompassing millions. Democracy at human level instead of top-down authorities

[–] Lemmino 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

There is still a power incentive. In the proposed system we would likely factions rapidly forming to gather the most power and resources as quickly as possible. It would probably be quite bloody. (What you are describing is effectively the tribe system, which rarely ended well for most tribes.)

As long as resource scarcity exists I just don't see this working out, unfortunately.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

In my mentioned system the power would be in cooperation. Fighting against that would lose power.

Resource scarcity is mostly a decision problem. Capitalism doesn't have incentive to let anyone benefit from the excessive resources so those in control won't decide for it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Capitalism is no more based on "infinite growth" than human psychology is based on "infinite pleasure".

Capitalism, like humans in general, is perfectly capable of surviving through extended periods in which the future will be worse than the past.

For example, the Japanese economy has been stagnant for a couple of decades, but Japan is still capitalist.

[–] Lemmino -4 points 1 year ago

Any system dealing with human nature will always be inherently flawed. The fact is, in over 250,000 years of our species existing, our technological prowess only really exploded once the concepts of money and trade were invented. Regulate these properly, and you have an incredibly powerful industrial machine that will improve everyone's lives.