What if we take the small gains workers made that let them retire in their fifties, fuck them into the dumpster, tell the peasants to work until they die, and give the money to the oligarchy instead?
this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
259 points (83.1% liked)
Memes
45661 readers
1129 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
They HAVE to pay the peasants or they won't work! Pay the oligarchs and it will eventually trickle down
The new thing is that capitalists are liberated from oppression like having to pay taxes.
That is some gourmet deep-fried shit.
Well yeah, but the neo-prefix is meant to signalise that a movement or ideology is based on the part thereafter but tries to reinvent itself and add new ideas.
The difference between "classic" capitalism and neoliberalism is that neoliberalism is way more reactionistic: even the consumer and the worker is baited into wanting to live in this society because they just don't know better and get manipulated into thinking they get a good product and an equal exchange.
And now we evolve into a more perverse form in which we pay not only with our money but also with our private data, all willingly because nobody really reads EULA's or thinks about the consequences of your data in the internet.
This will ultimately lead to surveillance capitalism, which is more or less already implemented by digitialiasation of people stuck in a dopamine loop.
Conservatives/capitalists always inventing new names for themselves so they don't seem like what they are.
"Neoliberal" is much more specific than "capitalist".
yea
looks at all of the various names various leftist political ideas
Ok.
Sure. Do the leftist values you align with have a name which tries to imply something else?
I just want Taco Trucks and YIMBY😔
Weird meme... is it making fun of how neoliberalism is capitalism, or excluding right-wingers from neoliberal by supposing it's anti-capitalist? Neoliberalism is a capitalist consensus. If we're talking US politics, both of the main parties represent factions of neoliberalism. It started with Carter's deregulations but neoliberal Reaganomics is basically the full-in commitment. Arguably we've moved past the neoliberal era since the 2008 crash and are now left with the mechanisms of neoliberalism minus the sincere belief in it.
Have you noticed how Biden has embraced Trump era tariffs while two Republican speakers passed spending bills with no cuts? Milton Friedman would not be happy about this.
Yup there's no alternative being offered to the current economic arrangement, the parties offer different brands of neoliberalism. Democrats want to ensure everyone can be included in this system, or at least the idea that everyone can. You get this in things like Kamala's "authentically me" videos or the tax incentives, just work hard and you'll succeed. Republicans offer a more fashy brand of it with the socially reactionary pandering but economically they generally pass bland neoliberal shit with extra loosening of regulations. Like Biden's biggest legislative victory is probably the CPA/Consumer Protection Act which restricted conditions people could file chapter 11, this benefits the debt holders ie credit card companies at the expense of making sure less people can escape their debts.
I think the "kids in cages" issue highlights how these things are processed by these politics. That treatment of immigrants is a byproducts of this neoliberal capitalist structure, people know it's wrong and use these politics as a way to morally absolve themselves when opportunities arise. Democrats being in power doesn't change the kids in cages, if anything climate change and mass migration will only get worse, however now it's not politically convenient for the kids in cages to be an issue. The result is it continues and people wash their hands clean by pointing to the other neoliberal faction as the source of the blame, when the issue is the system itself and having no alternative option.
It says capitalism lol. The words mean nothing and the points are made up
But if you're super rich, you get to spend your money as you please, and you basically get to do what you want.
Yes. Capitalism seems to be against freedom for all
That's because it is?
Yeah. Cap can never lib
Neoliberalism greatly expanded the dominance of market forces through deregulation, privatization, and regressive forms of taxation, while significantly reducing the state’s role in the economy through cuts to labor, welfare, and social protections.
Behind these economic reforms sat a new idea of what constitutes a good and free society—a concept about what direction we should all be striving in to become the best versions of ourselves. In the new neoliberal era, then, success would be reframed as a product of having exceptional individual qualities (rather than exceptional social privileges and advantages), while failure would be rooted in some kind of personal deficit (rather than in lack of opportunity, equality, or social support).
In the new neoliberal era, then, success would be reframed as a product of having exceptional individual qualities (rather than exceptional social privileges and advantages), while failure would be rooted in some kind of personal deficit (rather than in lack of opportunity, equality, or social support).
In a way it developed out of the pressures against any sort of class based notion's of analysis, because of the extreme anti-communism that was enforced through the academy and US-based political institutions. These were common approaches in the generation previous, MLK Jr. could represent that era as he argued for class policies as a Christian socialist, and you had labor organization and demonstrations like the March on Washington For Jobs and Freedom. Neoliberalism was the capitalist economic structure's answer to these threats, allowing for the structure to be retained and enhanced (inequality is more extreme than ever before), while making sure people as individuals are the subjects and not any notion of a group of people with common interests that may exert influence.