Capatilism is Objectively Superior to any other form of Governace.

[Leo Gura]

Capitalism is really defined by the modern banking and stock market systems. Banks generate loans (capital) for corporations. And corporate stock is traded publically.

That's what techncially distinguishes capitalism from old fashioned barter.

Truly nothing better than this system has yet been invented. Marxists have no clue how to replace this system with something better.

Edited yesterday at 05:34 AM by Leo Gura

[Infinity16]

I wonder if capitalism is necessary due to low conscious individuals. The big problem with a state-run economy is that there are so many variables that experts often miss the finer details (think about how Polymarket predicted the 2025 election while Alan Lichtman failed). This is known as the economic calculation problem. Furthermore, an economy run by the state can easily be manipulated by politicians for their own ends.

Many leftists on the internet actually call for a decentralized economy which is more based on cooperation rather than competition. Whether this can work in any current society is yet to be seen. This is oftentimes referred to as democracy in the workplace. Running with this analogy, we know that democracy didn't work so well in countries in which it was imposed from the top-down like Afghanistan and Iraq. It's also delivered mixed results in Tunisia which democratized without foreign intervention.

The bad news is that stage green isn't as popular as it makes itself out to be.

[Elliott]

If socialists would be half as smart as they say they are, they would beat capitalism. I don't mean 'the USSR would have won'. I mean Bernie Sanders would run 'BernRock' and it would be bigger than BlackRock, a big co-op that knocks out walmart and starbucks. 'Socialism' would only ever work as a bottom up movement, anarchy, yet the Socialists only try to work it top down. Socialists are liars(lie to themselves) and self-contradictory, they're tyrants in sheep's clothes.

[BlueOak]

Sure if capitalism existed in America. It doesn't. Corporatism does.

Sure if you live at the top.
The middle's comfortable.
If you are the bottom, where more people reside, its one of the more inferior forms of government.

Its end state is corportism or worse kleoptocracy and now techno feudalism.

[BlueOak]

6 hours ago, Elliott said:

How so?

Seriously.
You missed the cold war?

[Elliott]

14 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

Seriously.
You missed the cold war?

You thought the u.s. was going to attack the USSR? Seriously? The cold War was a result of the communist economic model.

[Elliott]

20 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

Its end state is corportism or worse kleoptocracy and now techno feudalism.

You think Scandinavian capitalism is headed this way?

[BlueOak]

12 minutes ago, Elliott said:

You thought the u.s. was going to attack the USSR? Seriously? The cold War was a result of the communist economic model.

Oh come on Elliott.
Do we need to go through the history of the Cold War and all the moves and countermoves?
Everything is global in scope you know that, more so each year.

Capitalism won. Communism was collapsed, and that's one of the reasons any attempt at reviving it meets with an unsurprising amount of arms delivered to the other side.

[BlueOak]

8 minutes ago, Elliott said:

You think Scandinavian capitalism is headed this way?

We are in techno feudalism right now. Scandinavia too yes.

Will it devolve into kleptocracy? It depends how much money Elon and others like him accumulate. Will countries have any agency if he gets enough? Some don't already

[Elliott]

Just now, BlueOak said:

Oh come on Elliott.
Do we need to go through the history of the Cold War and all the moves and countermoves?
Everything is global in scope you know that, more so each year.

You're the one that brought it up... now you're sidestepping from it.

Just now, BlueOak said:

Capitalism won. Communism was collapsed, and that's one of the reasons any attempt at reviving it meets with an unsurprising amount of arms delivered to the other side.

Someone attacked north Korea or russia?

[BlueOak]

2 minutes ago, Elliott said:

You're the one that brought it up... now you're sidestepping from it.

I'm amazed that you think the COLD WAR. Was internally fought inside Russia only. Or for some reason don't link the cold war to the fall of communism. If you are seriously telling me that I can discuss it with you.

[Elliott]

6 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

I'm amazed that you think the COLD WAR. Was internally fought inside Russia only. Or for some reason don't link the cold war to the fall of communism. If you are seriously telling me that I can discuss it with you.

How do you think the ussr expanded, Bernie Sanders style revivals, or tanks? That's why there was a cold war. Communism relies on totalitarianism.

[BlueOak]

6 minutes ago, Elliott said:

How do you think the ussr expanded, Bernie Sanders style revivals, or tanks? That's why there was a cold war. Communism relies on totalitarianism.

A few things here.

1, Communism is too authoritarian for me yes. But then so is almost every country on earth right now after the attempted social and economic alignment of east/west. You would say to a greater degree, I would say in some respects yes but the gap is closing because of this integration.
2, Socialism generally in western nations is not the same as in eastern ones. Apples to Oranges in that respect. You are almost reinforcing my greater point for me about capitalism. Socialist influences and institutions would arise and form very differently in Europe or America compared to Africa, Asia or Russia
3, There was a lot of reasons for a cold war, primarily ideology. If those had been two capitalist states reaching germany, I doubt a cold war would have happened.

Its important to note expansionism is not 1, related to communism or any ideology, and 2, practiced by those in most ideologies.

[Elliott]

1 minute ago, BlueOak said:

A few things here.

1, Communism is too authoritarian for me yes. But then so is almost every country on earth right now after the attempted social and economic alignment of east/west. You would say to a greater degree, I would say in some respects yes but the gap is closing because of this integration.
2, Socialism generally in western nations is not the same as in eastern ones. Apples to Oranges in that respect. You are almost reinforcing my greater point for me about capitalism. Socialist influences and institutions would arise and form very differently in Europe or America compared to Africa, Asia or Russia
3, There was a lot of reasons for a cold war, primarily ideology. If those had been two capitalist states reaching germany, I doubt a cold war would have happened.

Its important to note expansionism is not 1, related to communism or any ideology, and 2, practiced by those in most ideologies.

QUIT SIDESTEPPING

 

We're talking about the cold war!

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

 @Leo Gura, you mentioned that "Marxists have no clue how to replace this system with something better.". You are right, because they usually suggest removing the market (the distributed computational engine of value), which leads to the stagnation, as @Daniel Balan describes.

But the defenders of capitalism are missing the physics of the situation.

Capitalism is the best system for a world with infinite frontiers.
It is a suicide machine for a world with planetary boundaries.

We are currently undergoing a phase transition from the first world to the second.

When resources were effectively infinite, capitalism optimized for growth and innovation. It beat feudalism (order) and communism (central planning) because it processed information faster.
We are now hitting the "vertical cost curve" of a closed system (climate, demographics, war). In this environment, capitalism’s optimization function; capital accumulation via externalization, becomes a generator of existential risk. It incentivizes "free-riding" on planetary stability.

In the best case scenario, the next system won't be a return to central planning. It will be a regenerative market economy.

It keeps the price signal (the engine) but changes the objective function (the goal):
Instead of maximizing GDP (throughput), it maximizes integration (system health).
It can use asset-backed currencies to make planetary healing more profitable than extraction.
It can use unconditional economic floors ((Adaptive)UBI) to solve the precarity trap without seizing the means of production.

We don't need to "smash capitalism." We need to patch the kernel so it optimizes for planetary stability instead of relative gain.
 

[Leo Gura]

The Chinese have an interesting and potentially viable alternative. Although it still has a lot of capitalism in it.

Edited yesterday at 10:33 AM by Leo Gura

[Elliott]

18 minutes ago, Bjorn K Holmstrom said:

 @Leo Gura, you mentioned that "Marxists have no clue how to replace this system with something better.". You are right, because they usually suggest removing the market (the distributed computational engine of value), which leads to the stagnation, as @Daniel Balan describes.

But the defenders of capitalism are missing the physics of the situation.

Capitalism is the best system for a world with infinite frontiers.
It is a suicide machine for a world with planetary boundaries.

We are currently undergoing a phase transition from the first world to the second.

When resources were effectively infinite, capitalism optimized for growth and innovation. It beat feudalism (order) and communism (central planning) because it processed information faster.
We are now hitting the "vertical cost curve" of a closed system (climate, demographics, war). In this environment, capitalism’s optimization function; capital accumulation via externalization, becomes a generator of existential risk. It incentivizes "free-riding" on planetary stability.

In the best case scenario, the next system won't be a return to central planning. It will be a regenerative market economy.

It keeps the price signal (the engine) but changes the objective function (the goal):
Instead of maximizing GDP (throughput), it maximizes integration (system health).
It can use asset-backed currencies to make planetary healing more profitable than extraction.
It can use unconditional economic floors ((Adaptive)UBI) to solve the precarity trap without seizing the means of production.

We don't need to "smash capitalism." We need to patch the kernel so it optimizes for planetary stability instead of relative gain.
 

Yes. The problem isn't capitalism, private ownership, decentralized production: the problem is culture, laws, protections.

[Daniel Balan]

21 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The Chinese have an interesting and potentially viable alternative. Although it still has a lot of capitalism in it.

Wait, this has to be a joke. Then I should vote in the next election for the far right that is also far left candidate in the next election? That candidate wants to destroy liberal democracy, parliamentary system and replace it with a copy of the Chinese form of governance. One dictator, one party that governs the same way China does. 

Should I vote for that? Hell no! Fuck China, Fuck dictatorships, Fuck communism/socialism. I'd rather be a slave in a liberal democracy under capitalism than be a bit more prosperous in a dictatorship like China. Fuck that. 

 

Edited yesterday at 10:52 AM by Daniel Balan

[Raze]

49 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The Chinese have an interesting and potentially viable alternative. Although it still has a lot of capitalism in it.

I’m surprised you think that. So far they have almost all problems the west has but worse and with less of the benefits. 

Though to be fair a lot of it is the delayed result of stuff set in place by far less competent leaders and worse situations many decades ago.

Edited yesterday at 11:21 AM by Raze

[Daniel Balan]

1 hour ago, Bjorn K Holmstrom said:

 @Leo Gura, you mentioned that "Marxists have no clue how to replace this system with something better.". You are right, because they usually suggest removing the market (the distributed computational engine of value), which leads to the stagnation, as @Daniel Balan describes.

But the defenders of capitalism are missing the physics of the situation.

Capitalism is the best system for a world with infinite frontiers.
It is a suicide machine for a world with planetary boundaries.

We are currently undergoing a phase transition from the first world to the second.

When resources were effectively infinite, capitalism optimized for growth and innovation. It beat feudalism (order) and communism (central planning) because it processed information faster.
We are now hitting the "vertical cost curve" of a closed system (climate, demographics, war). In this environment, capitalism’s optimization function; capital accumulation via externalization, becomes a generator of existential risk. It incentivizes "free-riding" on planetary stability.

In the best case scenario, the next system won't be a return to central planning. It will be a regenerative market economy.

It keeps the price signal (the engine) but changes the objective function (the goal):
Instead of maximizing GDP (throughput), it maximizes integration (system health).
It can use asset-backed currencies to make planetary healing more profitable than extraction.
It can use unconditional economic floors ((Adaptive)UBI) to solve the precarity trap without seizing the means of production.

We don't need to "smash capitalism." We need to patch the kernel so it optimizes for planetary stability instead of relative gain.
 

This is spot on, unparalleled analysis. As I also predicted on my blog, I predict that the 21th century will be the bloodiest, most violent century to date. The most violent century thus far, the 20th saw the most horrific wars that mankind experienced.

In the 20th century the population of the earth was 2 billion. Now it has 8 billion, 4 times more mouths and bellies to feed, 4 times more shelter needed, 4 times more resources needed for survival. 

The unchecked capitalism is largely responsible for tremendous wealth& resources inequality across the globe. The west has benefited tremendously at the expense of the 3rd world. And now it seems that the 3rd world countries led by China, Russia and others will want to rectify the injustices that the west and capitalism brought by their economic exploitation of the underdeveloped countries. 

For about a month I started working out everyday, something which I never done before. I began brutally training my endurance, speed and stamina. Also I am brutally working my body out to make it steel like. I must become strong as an ox ASAP. The population is 4 times the size it was during the bloodiest century of mankinds existence, this means that the next war will be 4 times more brutal and deadly. This is not a drill, this is the real deal. I am preparing for war!

Edited yesterday at 11:33 AM by Daniel Balan