It’s not a capitalist ideology any more than psychology is. Not everything that involves the concept of ownership is inherently capitalist.
We should be pushing for better lives for everyone, and socializing things that aren’t working is obviously the end goal. But calling everything that mentions something you don’t like capitalism is extremism, plain and simple. Not everything is black and white.
It is absolutely a Capitalist ideology, because Liberalism centers around Private Property Rights. The idea is “the freer the markets, the freer the people.” No, I do not mean Libertarianism.
We should be pushing for better lives for everyone, yes. Capitalism, the system by which competing Capital Owners exploit workers via taking the surplus value of their labor, is not working. Exploitation is rising, wages are stagnating with respect to productivity, and the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall is causing this exploitation to be exported to the Global South. This endless M-C-M’ circuit by which commodity production services accumulation into fewer and fewer hands results in obscene wealth and power in the hands of the few.
That’s Capitalism, and that’s what I oppose, and presumably you as well. I know very well what Capitalism is, why it’s bad, why it cannot last forever, and why Socialism is better.
It doesn’t center around private property. It’s not even first on the list. It’s just one of many things they believe.
We can’t afford to alienate each other just because we disagree on one thing. It’s why in the LGBT community we include so many different types of queer people. The goal is to find and drive alliances so we can all get the things that we agree on.
Also, exploitation is rising in the short term, yes, and we should try to fix that. But take a broader look and recognize that the improvements we’ve gotten so far has been with an alliance that included liberals. Within the last century, the Pinkertons were literally killing people in the street for unionizing. That kind of stuff is not happening anymore, and it stopped happening in large part due to a leftist alliance that included many liberals.
It is centered on Private Property, because it’s focused on Capitalism. Property Rights are largely what separates liberals from Socialists.
Exploitation is rising in the long term. Pinkertons stopped murdering because American Unions crumbled and manufacturing was largely moved overseas, where we super-exploit for super-profits.
Liberals have been dragged kicking and screaming by radicals for their entire existance forward.
Gah, you’re so close to being correct. If you were to just qualify that last statements by saying “some liberals” instead of “all liberals”, you’d have it right. But your black and white statements ignore the reality, which is that most liberals are pro-union, most liberals are anti-exploitation, and most liberals are pro-socialized healthcare/energy/schools/etc, which are all left-leaning ideals.
You’re right, property rights is one of the only things separating liberals from socialists. Which means we agree on most things with them, and they are therefore fellow lefties.
I am referring to Liberalism the ideology, and those who follow it. Of course I am speaking of the average, do you expect me to make a poll?
Most liberals like to think that they are pro-union, but Capitalism has crushed most American Unions. Most liberals think they are anti-exploitation, but support Capitalism, which is necessarily exploitative. Most liberals are indeed pro Social Programs, but not Socialism, and so they generally fall short of enacting actual change.
Most liberals like to think that they are pro-union…
First, I just want to say that I appreciated the added nuance. In my mind you went from sounding super extremist to pretty reasonable with just a few added adjectives.
With that said, honest question: Are you’re mixing up neoliberalism and liberalism? Because the things you’ve said makes more sense if you replace “liberal” with “neoliberal” and “capitalism” with “neoliberalism”.
Not necessarily. If you’ve ever traded pokemon cards, then you know it’s possible for two people to be happy in a transaction. Again, if you meant “neoliberalism” your statements would make sense.
pro Social Programs, but not Socialism
Yeah, it definitely sounds like you’re talking about neoliberals now. If so, I agree. They’re definitely not leftist.
I am not mixing up thatcher-esque Neoliberalism with the enitrety of Liberalism. The Unions in America weren’t crushed because a random powerful figure took office, but because over a long period of weakening them and conflict that also led to the conditions for Reagan to take president.
Capitalism is not trade, I already explained what Capitalism is to you earlier. Exploitation isn’t when someone is unhappy, it’s the way Capitalists make profit, by paying workers less than the Value they create.
Socialism is Worker Ownership of the Means of Production.
It’s not a capitalist ideology any more than psychology is. Not everything that involves the concept of ownership is inherently capitalist.
We should be pushing for better lives for everyone, and socializing things that aren’t working is obviously the end goal. But calling everything that mentions something you don’t like capitalism is extremism, plain and simple. Not everything is black and white.
It is absolutely a Capitalist ideology, because Liberalism centers around Private Property Rights. The idea is “the freer the markets, the freer the people.” No, I do not mean Libertarianism.
We should be pushing for better lives for everyone, yes. Capitalism, the system by which competing Capital Owners exploit workers via taking the surplus value of their labor, is not working. Exploitation is rising, wages are stagnating with respect to productivity, and the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall is causing this exploitation to be exported to the Global South. This endless M-C-M’ circuit by which commodity production services accumulation into fewer and fewer hands results in obscene wealth and power in the hands of the few.
That’s Capitalism, and that’s what I oppose, and presumably you as well. I know very well what Capitalism is, why it’s bad, why it cannot last forever, and why Socialism is better.
It doesn’t center around private property. It’s not even first on the list. It’s just one of many things they believe.
We can’t afford to alienate each other just because we disagree on one thing. It’s why in the LGBT community we include so many different types of queer people. The goal is to find and drive alliances so we can all get the things that we agree on.
Also, exploitation is rising in the short term, yes, and we should try to fix that. But take a broader look and recognize that the improvements we’ve gotten so far has been with an alliance that included liberals. Within the last century, the Pinkertons were literally killing people in the street for unionizing. That kind of stuff is not happening anymore, and it stopped happening in large part due to a leftist alliance that included many liberals.
It is centered on Private Property, because it’s focused on Capitalism. Property Rights are largely what separates liberals from Socialists.
Exploitation is rising in the long term. Pinkertons stopped murdering because American Unions crumbled and manufacturing was largely moved overseas, where we super-exploit for super-profits.
Liberals have been dragged kicking and screaming by radicals for their entire existance forward.
Gah, you’re so close to being correct. If you were to just qualify that last statements by saying “some liberals” instead of “all liberals”, you’d have it right. But your black and white statements ignore the reality, which is that most liberals are pro-union, most liberals are anti-exploitation, and most liberals are pro-socialized healthcare/energy/schools/etc, which are all left-leaning ideals.
You’re right, property rights is one of the only things separating liberals from socialists. Which means we agree on most things with them, and they are therefore fellow lefties.
I am referring to Liberalism the ideology, and those who follow it. Of course I am speaking of the average, do you expect me to make a poll?
Most liberals like to think that they are pro-union, but Capitalism has crushed most American Unions. Most liberals think they are anti-exploitation, but support Capitalism, which is necessarily exploitative. Most liberals are indeed pro Social Programs, but not Socialism, and so they generally fall short of enacting actual change.
First, I just want to say that I appreciated the added nuance. In my mind you went from sounding super extremist to pretty reasonable with just a few added adjectives.
With that said, honest question: Are you’re mixing up neoliberalism and liberalism? Because the things you’ve said makes more sense if you replace “liberal” with “neoliberal” and “capitalism” with “neoliberalism”.
Reaganism (neoliberalism) crushed American unions. Unions were doing great up until then.
Not necessarily. If you’ve ever traded pokemon cards, then you know it’s possible for two people to be happy in a transaction. Again, if you meant “neoliberalism” your statements would make sense.
Yeah, it definitely sounds like you’re talking about neoliberals now. If so, I agree. They’re definitely not leftist.
I am not mixing up thatcher-esque Neoliberalism with the enitrety of Liberalism. The Unions in America weren’t crushed because a random powerful figure took office, but because over a long period of weakening them and conflict that also led to the conditions for Reagan to take president.
Capitalism is not trade, I already explained what Capitalism is to you earlier. Exploitation isn’t when someone is unhappy, it’s the way Capitalists make profit, by paying workers less than the Value they create.
Socialism is Worker Ownership of the Means of Production.
All in all, you should probably read Wage Labor and Capital.