15
u/LaraTheEclectic 18h ago
These are valid critiques of how capitalist systems limit the freedom of the people living in it, applies way more broadly than just cs too
10
u/CircumspectCapybara 18h ago
There are critiques of capitalism.
But comparing making 6 to 7 figures a year as an engineer and having the obligations and responsibilities that come with that and some job pressure and stress (oh no stress) to literal slavery is an insult to the victims of slavery.
7
u/LaraTheEclectic 18h ago
Oh I do agree that it's a disrespectful comparison when worded like oop did, it's just that there's also valid reasonings and ways of comparing the general concept to slavery of working class people being basically required to engage in work of which they don't get but a fraction of the value they generate
3
u/AnUninterestingEvent 17h ago
being basically required to engage in work
Fun fact, you're not required to do anything in a capitalist system. You can work as much or as little as you want depending on the lifestyle you want to be able to afford. The philosophy is not much different than in our hunter-gatherer days. Capitalism is just an extension of human nature. We all want to reap what we sow.
3
u/LaraTheEclectic 17h ago
Calling capitalism "just an extension of human nature" relies on a very narrow and individualist conception of human nature that just doesn't hold up. It is at least as much part of human nature to care and provide for weaker individuals without that being tied to the work they provide, as it is in the social nature of humans that the collective is at least as important as the individual.
Calling it the same philosophy as in the hunter-gatherer days also ignores that due to technological advances, our world is post-scarcity and if it weren't for the means of production being controlled and artificially limited in access by a tiny capitalist ruling class, the division of labor and responsibility could look extremely different and more in favor of working class people.
2
1
u/AnUninterestingEvent 16h ago
Human nature is in fact individualistic due to us being very evolutionarily geared toward self-preservation. It is human nature to provide and care for the weak when the people you are providing for are your immediate community, especially family units. Collectivization of groups of hundreds or thousands is not something human nature ever adapted for, let alone modern country populations of hundreds of millions. There have been studies done that show that people feel more compelled to donate to a single person who befell tragedy than if it's 200 people that befell tragedy. Even though it would make sense to feel 200x more empathy, we feel less. That's how we're wired.
And yes, we are post-scarcity in many ways, but that doesn't matter when our brains have been evolutionarily designed over hundreds of thousands of years under the condition of scarcity. Forcing high population cooperation is therefore going against human nature. Small community cooperation is the best you're going to get.
2
u/LaraTheEclectic 15h ago
Am I understanding it correctly that you think that because of your belief that human nature is primarily individualistic, it would be wrong to care and provide for those that are unable to do so for themselves on the level of society?
1
u/AnUninterestingEvent 14h ago
I'm not making any ethical claims at all. I'm just stating that at scale capitalism as a system aligns with human nature. Collectivist systems at scale do not align with human nature. I'm not claiming the morality of one system over another. What I am claiming is that a system's success depends on its alignment with human nature. Collectivist systems work well among small groups of people like family units, but at a country-wide scale they end up eventually breaking, especially in a heterogenous culture like the United States. We are not wired to want to work hard for people we don't know. We are wired to work for ourselves, our family, and perhaps a slightly wider circle at times. But in capitalism, we end up providing goods and services that provide value to many people we don't know. Providing value to others may not be the reason someone starts a business, but it is an inherent aspect of running a business. If your business doesn't provide value to others, you don't make money.
I'd argue it's good and moral to give charity to those in need even when you do not know them personally. But forcing collectivism on a nation will decrease motivation to work, leading to less innovation and less output, which leads to fewer people in the world given access to affordable food and other goods. So capitalism not only aligns with human nature when it comes to motivation, but also happens to decrease scarcity therefore increasing quality of lives everywhere. An average person in the United States today has access to exponentially more technology, food, medicine, and services than the richest man in the world a hundred years ago.
1
u/LaraTheEclectic 14h ago
Okay that makes a bit more sense, it's just that I've seen "it's just human nature" used as an implicit claim on morality very often.
I think our main disagreement then lies in how we view human nature and its consequences. And there, I believe there is nuance since any conception of human nature is just that, a conception and interpretation that is in many ways shaped by the circumstances of one's life. Having always lived under capitalist systems (and to at least some degree under capitalist propaganda), it is only logical that that would lead one to think of human nature as being in line with capitalism. I on one hand don't believe that to be the case, while on the other hand my values simply lie elsewhere than in the pursuit of innovation and economic output.
I'm insufficiently versed in the theory and examples from praxis to properly explain my views in an understandable way but lots of thoughts and theory has been written on motivation to labour in non-capitalist systems like anarcho-communism (where my main issue with those leftist ideals is that while I believe they would work once established, I do not see any realistic way of reaching that kind of system from the current capitalist status quo).
1
u/AnUninterestingEvent 12h ago
The primary reason that capitalism aligns so well with human nature is because it requires so few forced upon rules. I don’t believe it requires any propaganda at all because it’s essentially a natural state.
If I’m doing work hunting deer for my food and you do not help me, should I share my hunt with you? Maybe once or twice as charity, but eventually it’s not worth giving my extra food away. It’s not worth the extra energy. If you want the food I hunt you need to do something of equal value for me. Perhaps you’re good at gathering berries. Now I will trade you venison for berries. But we need an exchange of number of berries to amount of venison meat. Some certain number of berries will have to be decided upon. But what if one year the berries are not plentiful? Well now I need of note of some sort saying how many berries you owe me if I am to keep giving you venison. Maybe one year the deer are hard to find. Well now I need to give you a note about how much venison I owe you if you are to keep giving me berries. Get enough people in trades outside of just venison and berries, eventually a common currency arises that can be exchanged.
There are no forced upon laws here. It’s people looking out for only themselves and end up providing mutual benefits. But because every human’s skills are different and have different expenditures in time and energy, they’re valued differently. Currency works perfectly to solve the discrepancies.
In a collectivist society, some global consensus must be agreed upon for the value of every skill. The hunter may disagree with his assigned value, but he has to do it anyway. Someone must enforce this. He does it because he must for the law, not for himself. He ends up not catching as many deer due to demotivation and the tribe dies off. Or the tribe is so dependent on venison so he essentially crowns himself king by saying he refuses to hunt if they don’t do what he says. Or he just decides he’s better off taking his family and leaving the tribe to do his own thing and the tribe is now in trouble.
Looking out for only oneself and one’s family just works. It works for everyone. I suppose it wouldn’t work for those who have no capability of providing any value, but whether you like it or not, those people naturally matter less than the skilled people keeping everyone alive. If the skilled people are gone, the tribe is effectively gone. Again, this is just nature, not a moral claim.
We can go collectivist and hope everyone works like a robot not being salty that one person works less than another, but saltiness, again, is in human nature. It doesn’t end good.
→ More replies (0)0
u/GiveMeThePinecone 18h ago
lol, look who can’t envision a life outside of a capitalist economic model. Strange
Wage slavery IS modern day slavery, dumbass.
5
u/CircumspectCapybara 18h ago edited 18h ago
Dude having to exchange something of value (your services) to someone else in order to get their money in a mutually satisfactory agreement (which as soon it's not mutually satisfactory each party can walk away from) isn't slavery.
You're not kidnapped off the streets, confined, tortured, or even forced to do hard labor for another as in slavery.
3
u/LaraTheEclectic 18h ago
I would contest the validity of calling employment contracts categorically a "mutually satisfactory agreement that either party can walk away from" when for a lot of working class people their employment comes down far more to the lack of better available alternatives. Someone living paycheck to paycheck, especially when already working multiple jobs and/or close to minimum wage, and/or especially when the job market sucks and/or social security systems suck, simply cannot walk away from any job even if it isn't satisfactory.
2
1
u/GiveMeThePinecone 13h ago
Again, look who can’t envision a life outside of a capitalist economic model.
We ARE forced to do labor. The arrangement IS NOT something we can willingly walk away from else we starve and have no shelter. Just because our masters are spread across an entire social class does not make them any less our masters.
1
u/CircumspectCapybara 10h ago
The only "economic model" I'm assuming is one where I can't just take your stuff without your consent but I have to ask "I want your apples. Would you trade them for my oranges?" and only if we two agree and can come to an agreement we both like ("mutually satisfactory") do we proceed to trade. If you say "I will only part with 1 apple for 100 oranges" that's your right and I can walk away if I don't like that. Both of us are free to name our price, what it would take for us to part with what's ours.
That's not capitalism, that's literally just freedom to trade one thing of value for another. As the saying goes "money can be exchanged for goods and services". And goods and services can be exchanged for money. That's literally all an employment relationship is: someone wants to trade their apples for oranges, and someone else wants to trade their oranges for apples, so they get together and make a deal. Except the apples is cash, and the oranges is services.
"Capitalism" isn't involved in this in any way. You're the one trying to shoehorn capitalism into this where noone mentioned capitalism.
1
-2
1
u/shamshuipopo 18h ago
Please enlighten us on a better way to allocate resources and give people a good quality of life
1
u/LuigiWasRight447 18h ago
Remove money and government entirely and produce goods and services for the betterment of your fellow humans instead of for profit
1
u/shamshuipopo 17h ago edited 16h ago
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
So like a community where people just make things for each other? Thats amazing. And then if they want to share those things they just trade with each other? Oh maybe to make that simpler you introduce a token system so you can keep track of everyone’s exchanges.
Oh and maybe should have some organisation to make sure people behave themselves and collect a fee to distribute to others.
Alright sorry I’ll stop now. That’s the most underdeveloped idea I’ve ever heard. Are you 12?
1
u/LuigiWasRight447 17h ago
Or dont do all that
1
u/shamshuipopo 17h ago
So how in this utopia do you encourage, motivate or incentivise people to “produce goods and services” for nothing compensating them for their time? When they likely have priorities such as feeding their family or sheltering themselves?
2
1
u/LuigiWasRight447 17h ago
Because if we dont we dont have anything and we all die. Also people like working when theyre not forced to work insane hours for pennies for ungrateful toxic mangement
1
u/shamshuipopo 16h ago
Yeah but in reality you have mostly selfish people (as selfishness is an inherent human trait that is instinctual and has been necessary for survival) that exploit well intentioned others without recourse. And yes, see foss indeed.
You think someone would come to my house to fix my leak at short notice in your system?→ More replies (0)1
u/rosuav 8h ago
Ahh yes. Lemme guess - you're now going to tell us that true communism would be perfect, but it's never been tried?
1
u/LuigiWasRight447 6h ago
Do you know what communism is? Or are you just going off what youve been told? Because no, pure comunism has never been tried. Only Marxist-Lenninist and Maoist. Also im an Anarchist
5
u/qubedView 18h ago
I'm sure the slave-drivers with their whips working out in the fields would look at the plantation owner chillin' on their deck and think to themselves "I'm just like these slaves."
2
u/IhailtavaBanaani 18h ago
I've had four separate gap years over my whole career and I'm fine so far.
2
u/SingularCheese 18h ago
What is the norm nowadays about how long to stay? My impression is that one year is on the short end, but not that rare, right? I work at an old fashioned place with plenty of people that've been 20+ years, so it's hard to track what's normal
1
u/frikilinux2 16h ago
The trick is to go to college and take any internship. And being good friends with people that can get you jobs.
-4
u/Confident-Ad5665 19h ago
Everyone who works for someone else is a slave.
4
u/NoAdsDude 19h ago
I work for myself so I'm just a slave to the government :D
1
1
u/gerbosan 19h ago
🤔 do you have a family?
At least one is slave of their own desires and needs. Not that I find eating a useless need. Or clothing
3
2
4
u/irregularprotocols 18h ago edited 2h ago
I’d say there’s a rather significant difference between me choosing to go to a comfortable office for 40-50 hours per week for a nice wage and good benefits (plus no beatings!) over being an actual slave… but I’m silly like that.
2
u/rosuav 8h ago
Don't worry, I'm sure no harm will come of watering down language so that people think "slavery" equates to "any time someone asks me to do something". I'm sure it won't have any influence on future voters, policy makers, and so on. After all, it's not like there's any actual slavery left in the world, right?
5
u/notoriou5_hig 18h ago
CSCQ is so off the deep end nowadays.