Capitalism and the future..

I don't think it is wise to view technology as the precursor to capitalism's end, or to view it as an inherently "bad" thing. I think that a fundamental aspect of "progress" should be an emphasis on advanced technologies, and not to view technology as an impediment of the archaic revival. Please note that I think an archaic revival is necessary and obligatory at this stage of civilization, and that it is not mutually exclusive of advanced technologies, but it is dependent upon the death of capitalism.

The whole notion that you have to work your fingers to the bone as the central concept of existence is dying, and with it the propagandists message that hard work will buy you the American dream. Working your fingers to the bone should not be forced upon you or anyone - wage slavery is no way to live - rather, hard work and an authentic life should be born of a passion to help, feed, cloth, shelter and service your human brother and sisters. To enhance the physical and mental well-being of others. To protect our plant and animal friends. To worship the earth and its glory and protect it from being further pillaged and exploited. These are where the light of existence should take us, where our hard work should be created from. Not from MBA fabrications of competitive advantage, Ricardian free-trade, and other methods to compete against each other for tickets to play the game of life where we buy things that are mostly unnecessary.

Technology can only help us in that end, and in fact, is necessary.

LikeAnOcean wrote:

Is it wrong for me to think that with advancements in technology that capitalism is becoming obsolete?

Basically, technology has been replacing people for some time. Hypothetically speaking, lets say robots and computers do all of our work for us in a number of years. Will we eventually have a very few, very rich in control, handing out just enough to keep the rest of the population dumbed down and from rebeling?

Because of advancements, goods have become very cheap, but its only people who make it into specialized jobs who can enjoy the luxuries of life.

Of course, capitalism creates competition, which makes all of these advancements possible, but at what point does capitalism not work anymore and how much technology do we really need?

Thoughts?

this is an interesting post i'm really into that topic so i'm going to try writing a bit of what i think about it (i'm not english so excuse me if i don't get the technical terms right all the time :-D)

starting with the question: how much technology do we need?
i have to say: basically we don't need any technology at all because it's something unnatural and as the humanity is a product of the nature we are able to live without anything unnatural. i don't say that technology is not useful, i think it can be useful but it depends on how you use it and what you use it for....using it in a capitalistic world as an average for an exploitive, militant, competitive and inhuman system is not really - let's call it "advantegous".

"at what point does capitalism not work anymore?"
i think capitalism is a system that will naturally kill itself in the end because it's based on the exploitation of people and nature and at one point one of them will finally make it stop.
also the neoliberal economic system which is principally the idea of a free competition on the market will self-destruct because there are more and more formations of market monopolies (example: nobody would come up with the idea of launching a new motor company) which will ultimately stop the competition....

these are just two examples that, as i think, show that capitalism is going to end somehow or other but i also think that we shouldn't wait for it to end to prevent more catastrophes, we should end it active now because it is, as i already said before, inhuman and exploitive and we people should finally realize that we are just a small, small part of the nature, the world and the whole evolution and not the "kings" of it. we're dependant on nature so we should live in line with it and we should also realize that no one is better than the others so there is no right for anyone to stand over his fellow human beings. people should learn to live peacefull, respectfull and equally together with each other and together with other species.

lost-dog wrote:

capitalism is going to end somehow or other but i also think that we shouldn't wait for it to end to prevent more catastrophes, we should end it active now because it is, as i already said before, inhuman and exploitive

please name at least 3 socio-economic systems that are NOT "inhuman and exploitive"

lost-dog wrote:

LikeAnOcean wrote:

Is it wrong for me to think that with advancements in technology that capitalism is becoming obsolete?

Basically, technology has been replacing people for some time. Hypothetically speaking, lets say robots and computers do all of our work for us in a number of years. Will we eventually have a very few, very rich in control, handing out just enough to keep the rest of the population dumbed down and from rebeling?

Because of advancements, goods have become very cheap, but its only people who make it into specialized jobs who can enjoy the luxuries of life.

Of course, capitalism creates competition, which makes all of these advancements possible, but at what point does capitalism not work anymore and how much technology do we really need?

Thoughts?

this is an interesting post i'm really into that topic so i'm going to try writing a bit of what i think about it (i'm not english so excuse me if i don't get the technical terms right all the time :-D)

starting with the question: how much technology do we need?
i have to say: basically we don't need any technology at all because it's something unnatural and as the humanity is a product of the nature we are able to live without anything unnatural. i don't say that technology is not useful, i think it can be useful but it depends on how you use it and what you use it for....using it in a capitalistic world as an average for an exploitive, militant, competitive and inhuman system is not really - let's call it "advantegous".

"at what point does capitalism not work anymore?"
i think capitalism is a system that will naturally kill itself in the end because it's based on the exploitation of people and nature and at one point one of them will finally make it stop.
also the neoliberal economic system which is principally the idea of a free competition on the market will self-destruct because there are more and more formations of market monopolies (example: nobody would come up with the idea of launching a new motor company) which will ultimately stop the competition....

these are just two examples that, as i think, show that capitalism is going to end somehow or other but i also think that we shouldn't wait for it to end to prevent more catastrophes, we should end it active now because it is, as i already said before, inhuman and exploitive and we people should finally realize that we are just a small, small part of the nature, the world and the whole evolution and not the "kings" of it. we're dependant on nature so we should live in line with it and we should also realize that no one is better than the others so there is no right for anyone to stand over his fellow human beings. people should learn to live peacefull, respectfull and equally together with each other and together with other species.

Firstly, lost-dog, you write in English much better than most of us who are English speaking write in any other language. Well done!

If you can find it in Deutsche, you might appreciate Derrick Jensen's book Endgame.

mookeywrench wrote:

jimc3 wrote:

lost-dog wrote:

capitalism is going to end somehow or other but i also think that we shouldn't wait for it to end to prevent more catastrophes, we should end it active now because it is, as i already said before, inhuman and exploitive

please name at least 3 socio-economic systems that are NOT "inhuman and exploitive"

Capitalism

mookeywrench wrote:

capitalism/socialism are systems, not worldviews. Capitalism is an economic system controlled by the private sector, socialism is controlled by the gov't sector and that's the only difference.

They both act as conduits for worldviews, any worldview. Not solely consumerism (which is the worldview that is being criticized here). Any worldview created is caused by the end users of the system, not the system itself.

Having said that, capitalism puts the most power in the hands of the public. When the system gets infiltrated by greed, corruption, inferiority, or a worldview that is not popular with public opinion, it is much easier to shift that worldview elsewhere or wipe out the negative factors with capitalism than it is with socialism.

capitalism is the negative factor.


NEED not GREED.

mookeywrench wrote:

catefrances wrote:

mookeywrench wrote:

capitalism/socialism are systems, not worldviews. Capitalism is an economic system controlled by the private sector, socialism is controlled by the gov't sector and that's the only difference.

They both act as conduits for worldviews, any worldview. Not solely consumerism (which is the worldview that is being criticized here). Any worldview created is caused by the end users of the system, not the system itself.

Having said that, capitalism puts the most power in the hands of the public. When the system gets infiltrated by greed, corruption, inferiority, or a worldview that is not popular with public opinion, it is much easier to shift that worldview elsewhere or wipe out the negative factors with capitalism than it is with socialism.

capitalism is the negative factor.


NEED not GREED.

Capitalism is a neutral factor. Greed is the negative factor derived from either the supply or the demand...not the conduit.

Greed is injected into the equation when corporations get in bed with government to protect themselves from competition. This is not capitalism, this is crony capitalism or corporatism which is actually our current day system. Capitalism gets a bad reputation because most people are unwilling to spend time to discern the differences.

mookeywrench wrote:

catefrances wrote:

mookeywrench wrote:

capitalism/socialism are systems, not worldviews. Capitalism is an economic system controlled by the private sector, socialism is controlled by the gov't sector and that's the only difference.

They both act as conduits for worldviews, any worldview. Not solely consumerism (which is the worldview that is being criticized here). Any worldview created is caused by the end users of the system, not the system itself.

Having said that, capitalism puts the most power in the hands of the public. When the system gets infiltrated by greed, corruption, inferiority, or a worldview that is not popular with public opinion, it is much easier to shift that worldview elsewhere or wipe out the negative factors with capitalism than it is with socialism.

capitalism is the negative factor.


NEED not GREED.

Capitalism is a neutral factor. Greed is the negative factor derived from either the supply or the demand...not the conduit.

i didnt say greed was the conduit.. but now that you mention it, im saying capitalism is.

the bottom line is, today's crony capitalism is giving true capitalism a bad name

I think everyone agrees that what passes today for "capitalism" is at the very least problematic and at the worst, "evil".

but it is inarguable that thousands of years of history, and the most advanced philosophical thought, has proven that true capitalism, while not perfect (nothing is), is the most humane and fair system.

mookeywrench wrote:

jimc3 wrote:

I think everyone agrees that what passes today for "capitalism" is at the very least problematic and at the worst, "evil".

problematic for a change in course of action, yes. But calling a system evil can only be placed in the hands of the user, not the system itself.

And 'capitalism' shouldn't get bastardized and mislabeled or else it creates this kind of slippery slope shown throughout this thread and it's the socialist qualits of the mixed system that creates the problematic dynamics.

oh come on. read and quote everything I said. "today's crony capitalism is giving true capitalism a bad name" and "true capitalism...is the most humane and fair system."

So I really resent the "bastardized and mislabeled" charge. What you said, "socialist qualits of the mixed system that creates the problematic dynamics", is exactly what I meant by "what passes today for "capitalism" is..."evil".