• Cethin@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I want to comment on this first:

    … while we have had many counties try and fail to make a thriving socialist society. We have had capitalism thrive and make everyones lives better.

    First, socialist countries haven’t been allowed to thrive. They’re a threat to the established capitalist status-quo. That’s what the entire red scare period was about; undermining leftist nations so they fail. See the Guatemala coup for example. The country removed their dictatorship and formed a democracy. It happened to elect a leftist president who implemented a minimum wage and began granting land to peasants. This pissed off the United Fruit Company (now Chiquita) who were benefiting from cheap land and exploiting labor. They had the US overthrow the democracy and instate a dictatorship (which ended up committing a genocide).

    This has happened many times. The only leftist nations that were able to survive this are ones with strong governments and cultural hegymony (basically dictatorships with strong restrictions on citizens). This doesn’t mean that’s the only possibility because that’s the only ones that survived, it just means those are more stable when undermined by a powerful external force. It’s like asking why everyone who has been shot in the head has died. It’s not their fault someone else shot them.

    (Also, many capitalist nations have failed, and that equally is not a sign that capitalism is destined to fail.)

    Now for this:

    So I’m curious how do you expect innovation to happen in a communist world.

    Innovation happens all the time without capitalism. In fact, capitalism often hinders innovation. The requirement of capitalism is profit seeking. If you don’t think something will make a profit, you shouldn’t invest in it.

    I think it’s penicillin that almost didn’t exist because of capitalism. (This is from memory, so some parts may be wrong) The company was trying to create a certain drug. During the experiments penicillin was found. The company told them to move on, but the people running the experiment saw an opportunity and continued developing it on their own. Under capitalism, you shouldn’t persue unlikely but potentially beneficial, though possibly not profitable, possibilities. Can you imagine the number of times this has happened and the people involved listened to what they were told?

    People like to innovate. Just look at makers online. They make all kinds of stupid shit that won’t ever make money just to see what will happen. Profit is not the thing that creates innovation. Human ingenuity is. If you give humans enough resources to persue what they want, they will innovate.

    Also, generally communism or other leftist ideals aren’t advocating for equality in outcomes. They’re advocating for equality in opportunity. If you’re born wealthy, you shouldn’t get special access to thing that an average person doesn’t have access to. You shouldn’t be allowed to persue your goals when an average person can’t. However, if you create something that makes your life easier or better, that’s not going to be removed from you. There’s equal opportunity to improve your life, but not everyone will persue things equally.

    So why do you think we should change to communism, instead of eradicating blind brand loyalty and cracking down on wealth gained through stifling others.

    Personally, I’m more towards anarchism than communism, but I see value in both and they share so much in common.

    How would you go about eradicating “eradicating blind brand loyalty and cracking down on wealth gained through stifling others”? Those are fundamental aspects of capitalism. The goal of capitalism is to increase profits by any means possible, which includes breaking laws when it’s more profitable to do so. Eradicating brand loyalty is only possible if you elemenate labels, but that also creates the opportunity for cheap alternatives to undercut on quality. Exploiting labor is also fundamental to capitalism. If the goal is profit then you should pay as little as possible for as much as possible. If you don’t then someone else will undercut you and you’ll fail while they exploit.

    There’s no avoiding it under capitalism because the fundamental goals are misaligned with morality. The only choice is a system that favors morality, potentially by making moral options profitable or just not prioritizing profit. You can’t really “fix” capitalism. The fundamentals are rotten. You can improve it, but it’ll always be misaligned with what we want. There may be a place for capitalism under another system, but capitalism as the foundation is never going to prioritize humanity, good, and doing what’s right.

    • blackstampede@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s worth pointing out that the vast majority of innovation comes from students, researchers, and people working in tech, who, alongside their generally higher education, also aren’t working 9-5, on-site jobs.

        • blackstampede@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree. I’m adding on to the parent comment to provide an example of a real situation in which people who could generally make ends meet while doing very little work are instead producing the bulk of our new technologies, discoveries, and (as you mention) optimizations.