Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Capitalism: Misery and perplexity
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    The tension between these two narratives is valuable, as history cannot be entirely reduced to individual decisions or broad forces (weather, resource depletion, financial crisis, geopolitical upheaval, demographics, plague, etc.).

    Surprise.

    The central banks and states have expended all their ammunition-- lowering interest rates, creating money out of thin air to bolster systemic liquidity, buying bonds and other assets to prop up shaky markets, and borrowing immense sums to prop up government spending-- and there is little left for the next crisis.

    How it could happen to most progressive social organization? Strange.

    Could Hillary, or some other leader, forestall these deeply structural crises? The short answer is no. The only thing a leader can actually do is lower expectations so the erosion of promises that cannot be kept will be accepted as inevitable, and bolster hope while demanding sacrifices of all those who have benefited from the status quo.

    If we set aside the rose-colored glasses, we find that Franklin Roosevelt didn't actually "lead the nation out of Depression." The nation was still deeply entrenched in the Depression in 1940, after 8 years of FDR's leadership. It took World War II .. to extricate the U.S. from the grip of bad debt.

    At least capitalist prostitutes openly declared that it won't be better soon and you need to prepare for war, as they need one.

    No leader can reverse the dynamics of mutually reinforcing crises. No one can reverse the diminishing returns on financialization, debt, centralization, financial fakery, rentier state-cartel parasitism, or reverse the decline in paid work, the erosion of well-being and health and rising inequality.

    One hundred years ago, to the similar escapade during hard crisis situation of emerging capitalist state, one man stood and said:

    There Is Such A Party!

    image

    sample1050.jpg
    413 x 343 - 37K
  • 8 Replies sorted by
  • kurthkurth

    it's interesting the coincidence of your continuing propaganda about the superiority of communism....and the current news cycle

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    it's interesting the coincidence of your continuing propaganda about the superiority of communism....and the current news cycle

    Enough to look at communist predictions and interesting coincidence with things happening around you in real material world. :-)

  • Nino_IlacquaNino_Ilacqua

    Problem with communism is that it leads to immense burocracy. And burocrocy, beyond a minimum necessary for social organization, is a form of parasitism. With this I am not defending capitalism, which is an hidden form of slavery.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Problem with communism is that it leads to immense burocracy. And burocrocy, beyond a minimum necessary for social organization, is a form of parasitism. With this I am not defending capitalism, which is an hidden form of slavery.

    1. Immense burocracy statement is false. In countries after capitalist counterrevolution managing structures became bigger while doing significantly less tasks. Their efficiency dropped. Problem with communism is that you do not understand that it is and it is much worse :-)
    2. Parasitism is the core of capitalism, as whole ruling class consist from parasites. Being parasite just means that you provide to society much less compared to that you are getting from it.
    3. Capitalism is not hidden form of slavery. While you don't have an owner (even hidden) who can kill you any time or sale you to another one it is not slavery.
  • Nino_IlacquaNino_Ilacqua

    1 Statement "burocracy got bigger" does not deny statement "leads to immense burocracy".
    Unfortunately both system share this plague. 2 Agree 100% 3 Effects of disobedience do not relate to presence of slavery. A slave is expropriated of most of the fruits of his work and left with mere minimum to survive and continue work. Exactly as in capitalism. Difference with past societies is that modern slaves pay personally for food, shelter and distractions. Does not change core of relationships with masters,

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Statement "burocracy got bigger" does not deny statement "leads to immense burocracy". Unfortunately both system share this plague.

    Ok, so original statement was wrong. So, you moved to light version :-)

    In reality for hierarchical systems you need certain minimum size of managing structures, it is defined by communication limits and also limits of humans abilities.

    In capitalism managing structures most of the time are extremely inefficient. Part of it is that many of them become safe harbor from the horrific competition struggle in capitalism, hence many people want to be in it.

    Effects of disobedience do not relate to presence of slavery. A slave is expropriated of most of the fruits of his work and left with mere minimum to survive and continue work. Exactly as in capitalism. Difference with past societies is that modern slaves pay personally for food, shelter and distractions. Does not change core of relationships with masters,

    Slavery is social organization and has widely known and common definition. You just use wrong words. Thing that you are referring to is called exploitation in any class society.

  • Nino_IlacquaNino_Ilacqua

    To entertain a love relation with someone who is not the official partner is called "a triangle" , although a triangle has a well known definition in a geometric contest which has nothing to do with love affairs :-). It is a wrong word, but it illustrates clearly and efficiently the nature of a relation. Just as the word "slavery" referred to present situation in capitalistic societies. Modern slave have a few benefits over the old ones, but it is also more difficult to realize the nature of their (our) status.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    To entertain a love relation with someone who is not the official partner is called "a triangle" , although a triangle has a well known definition in a geometric contest which has nothing to do with love affairs :-).

    Bad example, I think you understand it :-) As it comes from exactly normal triangle you can make up in your head from this 3 people.

    Just as the word "slavery" referred to present situation in capitalistic societies. Modern slave have a few benefits over the old ones, but it is also more difficult to realize the nature of their (our) status.

    Using wrong words lead to not understanding how things are in reality.

Add a Comment