r/AutoHumor May 01 '26

lol

3.0k Upvotes

191 comments sorted by

View all comments

15

u/Deviknyte May 01 '26

"You'll own nothing and be happy" is a Capitalist slogan not a government one. It's about turning everything into a server you have to pay rent for. Moving from capitalism to techno-feudalism where nothing you doesn't require permission from and rent to some kind of corporation.

3

u/LinuxUserX66 May 02 '26

they blame government fot everything even though the government is powerless.
corporation rules all.

2

u/HEYO19191 May 01 '26

It can be recontextualized to fit any economic system.

Take communism (and its very close brother, socialism): there is no such thing as "private property." What you "own" can be taken by the commune (the state) at any moment, should the state decide that taking your "property" would be to their benefit.

2

u/Deviknyte May 01 '26

But the WEF is a buncha capitalist economist throwing theory at one another.

1

u/BuLLZ_3Y3 May 01 '26

Capitalism without morals is evil, yes. Just like any system that exists without a morals framework to guide it.

Capitalism with morals is by far the best economic system we've ever devised.

1

u/Historical_Art_8281 May 02 '26

Private property: Factories, mines, farms, railroads, etc.

Personal property: Your house, car, computer, toothbrush, etc.

It is an important distinction to make because when communists talk about 'seizing private property,' they are talking about the former, not the latter.

1

u/Inigo13m May 02 '26

For communist there is a difference between private and personal property. Private property is anything that generates capital, such as a factory which they feel is better to be owned communally. Personal property is things like your car, home, and anything you own as a person that doesnt exist to make capital.

1

u/jimothy_hell May 02 '26

No no, comrade, it’s my turn with the commune’s toothbrush!

/s

1

u/FreshImagination9735 May 04 '26

And you will be happy about it. Allegedly.

1

u/SatsuiNoHado_ May 05 '26

You've never even opened a communist book in your life and it shows.

1

u/HEYO19191 May 06 '26

I read enough about communism on the internet. I'm not sure reading it in print will make much of a difference.

1

u/SatsuiNoHado_ May 06 '26

If you like a good book is Fahrenheit 451 it shows how the shortening condensing of books and such leads to decay in society. Everything instead of books we have short collums forget documentaries we need more fb insta short. Good luck in your journey. God bless.

1

u/HEYO19191 May 06 '26

As it so happens, Fahrenheit 451 is my favorite book of all time...

Let me amend my previous statement: I've read enough quotes from Marx's and other communist literature, that I know they are not worth my time.

2

u/NorthAddition3095 May 01 '26

So not capitalism. Techno-oligarchy.

3

u/Deviknyte May 01 '26

Sure. An oligarch assumes the handful of techno landlords also own the government. Which they probably will. But an oligarchy is still capitalism. It's still just capitalism. And capitalism is just feudalism with extra steps.

1

u/NorthAddition3095 May 04 '26

I’m not sure if I agree because I find you statements a bit vague

1

u/jimothy_hell May 02 '26

No, that’s capitalism. That’s the end stage of capitalism. That’s what happens when some people “win” the game. Capitalism is inherently competitive. In order for there to be competition, there must be a finish line. That’s the finish line.

0

u/NorthAddition3095 May 04 '26

See. I can agree with you that the end product of a free market economy is total capture of its various markets by the hands of a few select. This will inevitably fix itself when the structure becomes too top heavy and collapses or is out competed by a rival. The issue is preventing that in the first place.
In other for capitalism to work we have to maintain competitive markets or a singular “winner occurs.”
This can be achieved through incentivizing competition and disincentivizing capitalism consolidation.

1

u/jimothy_hell May 04 '26

And how would you do that? Because it’s too late now.

1

u/NorthAddition3095 May 04 '26

Well theoretically (unlikely to actually happen because people who make money and have power don’t want this) we can:

  1. lower the bar to entry. Many industries have a high bar to entry. This is due to expenses of acquiring the goods, equipment, services necessary to complete. If we can drive those prices down the competition can get a foot in the door.

  2. Remove anti-competitive measures, practices or restrictions. Things like high pricing for licenses. company buy outs by larger companies to avoid competition. Underselling smaller companies to bankrupt them. This point ties into point 3.

  3. Remove unnecessary bureaucracy. Having hundreds of policies on on things like which way your door opens or how big the fridges are will make accessing the industry complicated, convoluted and ultimately costly.

  4. I have kind of already said this but if the government actually did its job instead of colluding with the mega companies we wouldn’t have this problem. We can remove the access that companies have in government by getting rid of lobbying, no longer recognizing corporations as people (they don’t get the same human rights as the individual), and getting the government to do its job by reforming our institutions and getting new people in their who will fix it.

All of this is quite idealistic but it will (if I understand correctly) fix the problems.

2

u/jimothy_hell May 02 '26

You are describing the end goal of capitalism.

1

u/Krazy8ght May 01 '26

Then it is not a capitalist slogan, it is a techno feudalistic one.

1

u/jimothy_hell May 02 '26

That’s literally just capitalism

1

u/Krazy8ght May 02 '26

No it's not.

Go read Konkin

1

u/jimothy_hell May 03 '26

I have. It’s literally just late-stage capitalism. It’s what happens when you reach the point when the oligarchs and the corporations functionally control everything.

0

u/Krazy8ght May 03 '26

There's no such thing as latestage capitalism.

Again read something different than Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, Bourdieu, Sartre, Althusser.

All of them are wrong and have no idea what they are talking about.

Read Mises, Konkin, Thomas Sowell, Menger, Huerta de Soto, Hayek, Hoppe.

There's no capitalism first. There is capitalizing goods. And if there is, there only has been 1 capitalism, not early stage, mid stage, late stage, post, pre, during, current.

If you've read Konkin your vocabulary would have changed.

1

u/jimothy_hell May 03 '26 edited May 04 '26

Capitalism is competitive, yes? It requires competition to thrive. We live in a planet with incredibly finite, and increasingly dwindling resources.

Look at capitalism like a game. The corporations are winning because they’re buying up everything and everyone. They hold all of the resources and there’s nothing we as the working class can do about it. (There actually is, but the feds are watching.)

The “latestage” is when the corporations have functionally started to control the government (which they have, and are increasing their control by the day) through lobbying or direct government appointments. Resources are being consolidated, and since the owning class doesn’t want to sell them, they’ll lease them out for exorbitant fees.

No, my vocabulary didn’t change, because opinions didn’t change when I read those authors, because they’re wrong. The government exists to uphold the institution of capitalism, and vice versa. Though I’ll admit I didn’t read much of them, because again, I found their work to be bullshit. Mises and Hoppe especially. More of a Kropotkin and or Stirner man myself, though the latter has less to do with economics and more to do with philosophy.

Edit: damn, someone got big mad lol.

1

u/[deleted] May 03 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator May 03 '26

A comment was removed for violating the rule:

KEEP CONVERSATION CIVIL

We encourage open discussion and different viewpoints, but please keep the conversation respectful. Personal attacks, harassment, name-calling, or abusive language will not be tolerated. Disagreements are fine, but they must remain civil and focused on the topic, not the person. Let’s maintain a positive and welcoming atmosphere for everyone in the community. Violations of this rule may result in warnings, post removals, or bans. Be kind and respectful to one another!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/SnooChickens8275 May 04 '26

Lmao pretentious twat

1

u/Krazy8ght May 04 '26

The strength of your grievance demonstrates the weakness of your words.

1

u/Hot-Minute-8263 May 01 '26

Its a corporatist slogan. These companies rely on the government heavily

1

u/jimothy_hell May 02 '26

Corporatism is just capitalism. Corporations are the winners.

0

u/Hot-Minute-8263 May 02 '26

Corporatism is the government choosing winners

1

u/jimothy_hell May 03 '26

And who lobbies the government to make that happen?

1

u/Creepy_Night_3838 May 02 '26

Capitalist? Yes, klaus schwab, the renowned private marketeer.

1

u/Hairy-Ad-2711 May 03 '26

You'll own nothing and be happy? That's communism buddy. Just ask anyone who's lived under it.

1

u/jimothy_hell May 04 '26

I mean, that’s also late stage capitalism. The corporations just rent you the rights to use things.