What murica has is what happens when you take the breaks off and let crap run to its logical extreme (and with rampant corruption where the cars breaks used to be)

Regulatory capture.

Revolving doors.

Political dark money.

Monopolies that manage to be technically not monopolies some frakkin how.

Rackets that never get charged as such.

Planned obsolescence.

Anticompetetive and anti consumer practices all over and the erosion of rights - you effectivly don’t own what you buy and can’t resell it anymore.

Trade agreements to export this insanity to other countries.

Granting corporations the ability to sue NATIONS over “lost profits” in response to resonable regulation!

Instead of “harnessing greed” its run rampant and unchecked to the point its destroying our environment at an insane pace. And its spreading beyond america. It has been for years most people just haven’t realized it yet. (Ed: by “it”, I mean this corrupt thing that America thinks of as capitalism, is overtaming what you may think of as calitalism)

The cancer has metastisized, and we’ll need to reinvent a strongly regulated similar system that rejects the clear broken parts in order to excise it - capitalism as is, is lost. It’s not sustainable.

I realize I’m talking in a very pro socialist/pro communist space but what I’m saying doesn’t mean I think capitalism was always terrible. But any good times it had are soon coming to an end.

Well there was a guy with a funny beard who wrote about what happens when capitalism produces more goods and services than could ever be reasonably consumed by the populace of the world. He wrote about how there were basically 2 coutcomes. Either the the rising supply just keeps pushing prices down until the only issue comes down to a logistics and distribution problem and money functionally becomes pointless and state power doesnt have any heirarchy to enforce. Or the people with money and power enforce artificial scarcity, through tactics like letting crops die in the fields, or only release so many diamonds into the market and promiting it as a good thing, to protect their wealth and power.

We’ve used every economic system by itself

Because a few hundred years with constantly changing technology is an exhaustive test of every possible version of organizing society. Pack up folks, it’s all been tried and only one thing works or will ever work.

The biggest issue is that this is a doomer self defeating argument. If you don’t believe something is possible, then it isn’t. Even if total communism is an unreachable goal, why not try to move closer to it? Liberalism is a walking contradiction, with economic liberalism being almost incompatible with social liberalism. That hasn’t stopped it from having drastic positive and negative effects on human history from people trying to live by it.

Furthermore, the idea that communism is a dead end reinforces the toxic view that anyone attempting to strive closer towards it is a threat that must be eliminated. Anti-communist sentiment has led to and enabled some of the worst atrocities of all time. The best part is that many of the people accused of being communists merely wanted liberation.

The fact is, if communism was wiped from existence and Karl Marx erased from history, the same ideas would evolve out of Christianity, or liberalism, or any ideology that isn’t a fucking death cult. This is because Marx did not make a unique and unprecedented observation, he just put the pieces together first. Egalitarianism and sharing is as important to human success as territorialism and self interest.

Finally, Marx did believe communism would come out of industrialized societies with enough resources to go around. That is not the state that the Soviet Union or China were in when they declared themselves communist. Making absolute statements about the end state of all attempts at something is setting yourself up for failure far more than trying a new way to make something theoretically possible happen.

I think it’s pretty clear we aren’t necessarily talking only about the quantity of bills passed, but also the quality

This (please don’t stone me for just saying a word, but I tried to express this point in another comment)

Not being serious there feller

Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !selfawarewolves@lemmy.ml

It’s cheaper than taking measures against it, but it for sure ain’t free

Or investing in improving things like fusion energy and superconductors

I think it’s been the shorthand that people use because it’s so similar to reddit and it’s easy to understand.

They’re called communities and I don’t actually know how to link to a community using the Lemmy format.

I think it’s !memes@lemmy.world

Yeah I think it stands for community. To visit c/196@blahaj.zone for example, you can go to lemmy.world/c/196@blahaj.zone. Although I’m not sure writing c/ links to the community in comments

They certainly shouldn’t complain about reciprocity. They will though.

Except that some of the absolute worst ecological tragedies in the modern world were done in socialist systems

The Dust Bowl. Exxon Valdez. Deepwater Horizon.

You’re suggesting heavy regulation of social and economic systems which is the entire point of socialism. You say socialism doesn’t work, but that is exactly what you’re describing.

And capitalism does not want to exist in a society of international regulation. Those concepts are at odds with one another.

If you like markets you might be more interested in learning about democratic market socialist countries and how they operate. The Nordics lean in that direction - after all, social democracy spawned out of orthodox marxism. The core idea in OG Nordic economics is simple: more democracy. You don’t need a min. wage, let unions bargain for their salaries, which is why McDonalds famously pays such a massive min. wage in Denmark. Fund and support democratically owned housing (housing coops, of which 20% of Norway resides in and still growing vs pop. growth despite no more gov. funding) or democratically run grocery stores (Finland has the highest density of consumer coops in the world) - housing coops usually have democratically agreed policies like not being able to treat your property like a commodity/investment by primarily renting it out (thus not contributing as much to rising housing prices), and consumer coops have been at the forefront of more environmentally and labour friendly behaviour. All the Nordics have worker board representation - workers make up a percentage of the board and help steer the company. There’s also the social wealth funds in Norway that give the government the power to guide corporations towards more ethical behaviour by owning significant amounts of shares in businesses, both domestically and internationally - although some argue Norway could learn from the Alaska SWF which pays its citizens dividends from the SWF. All of this builds towards economic democracy, or more commonly known as “socialism”, but in a way that has had great success. They’ve reeled some of those things back in recent decades, and the negative effects are clear to see - Norway stopping its funding of housing coops has meant a growing housing crisis much like the rest of Europe (with few exceptions, like Vienna (Austria) and Finland where socialised housing plays a bigger role).

It is absolutely not our growth as a population that has affected climate change. That’s capitalist doomer propaganda. Those actually responsible for it are the few at the top of capitalist hierarchies. Politicians, billionaires, oil and coal barons. Right now we van feed up to 11 billion people, yet there is still mass starvation and poverty. Capitalists require poverty so that people are desperate enough to work the shitty jobs the capitalists “create”.

As for the rest of what you said, I briefly touched upon this, but even CCP and USSR admitt(ed) they weren’t really communist, and whether they’re socialist is extremely debatable. They’re not communist because by their own admission they’re preparing for a communist world, but they keep saying that and it never comes about. These regimes lie constantly, but even if they lied rarely I’d still not believe they want actual communism because it’d involve giving up their power. What these states actually are is state capitalist.

They’re communist in the same way the Nazis were socialist, or the DPRK is a democratic republic: they’re not.

That’d just it, there’s nothing as efficient as it current system. There are plenty of options that are less efficient and better for the environment/people but nothing that’s as efficient in terms of resource allocations.

Speaking of separate things, my post was about compromise, not CO2 emissions, but don’t let that get in the way of your enlightened capitalist proselytizing. Neo-liberal governments are setting goals that are convenient to capital (i.e. too little too late) while failing to even hit those goals and also bending rules (e.g. we reduced emissions by moving polluting manufacturing overseas, as if the pollution is not happening on the same planet).