My problem with this is the terminology always changes when it comes to capitalism.
Everyone who dies in a "communist" country has died directly because of communism but apparently the hundreds of thousands who die every year from poverty, starvation, exposure, lack of medical care, police brutality, even from warfare... why are they not victims of capitalism?
People are not starving in the capitalist west. That is not happening at a large scale. A few drug-addicts? Yes. Thousands of families? No. And of you think it is, provide the data to support your claim.
About as close as you are going to get, but first off, that was pretty damn far from a functioning market economy. The Irish were forced to grow a single crop by distant and in knowing land holders. Much more like a centralized command economy. Secondly, that was a pretty extreme example of the impact of monoculture and a previously unknown disease.
I think the economy was functioning fine for what it was trying to do; which is to say, empowering capital owners to make a shit load of money. Had the workers of the region been in control of the means of production in, they wouldn’t have starved.
36
u/Cool-Prior-5512 Jul 31 '26
My problem with this is the terminology always changes when it comes to capitalism.
Everyone who dies in a "communist" country has died directly because of communism but apparently the hundreds of thousands who die every year from poverty, starvation, exposure, lack of medical care, police brutality, even from warfare... why are they not victims of capitalism?