Where do you think that the 'profit' comes from, exactly? So let's for a second think about everyone's favorites-- the oil barons. Where do their profits come from? Is it some closed circuit of buying and selling that only exists among the privileged elite? No, it comes primarily from the middle class. I can guarantee that they have absolutely no interest in pricing themselves out of a market.
In the UK the government closed down all the branch lines of the railways and privatised them. This process then drove people onto the roads and the Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said things like 'if a person is still using public transport in their thrities then they are a loser'
She did this because she is working for the corporations. She was helping the car industry and the oil industry which was also privatised (sold off to private control under global investors who can then dictate prices)
Also, I don't believe in 'truth' because I don't think there is one.
There are certain things that can be agreed upon.....for example if i take a gun and walk upto you and blow your head off without any provocation then this will widely be perceived as a bad thing to do.....do you recognise the 'truth' of that or do you think it would be ok for me to do that?
Capitalists have an interest in all people-- if only as potential markets. Even extremely poor people have a degree of spending power, and there are businesses that cater to them as well. If you're saying that we shouldn't be giving people exactly what they want/think they want, then yes, I agree… but in a democracy, or a system with 'fair and equal representation', how are you going to convince people that they don't want what they think they want, or tell them that they should actually want what you personally think they want? Advertising? Propaganda? Mind control?
Advertising, propoganda and mind control is exactly what capitalism uses to convince people that they need things that they don't....it confuses wants with needs (see 'Affluenza' -Oliver for more on this perspective
Adam Curtis made a good documentary which is available online called 'The Century of the Self' which explains how corporations worked with the nephew of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays who used the ideas of his uncle to emotionally manipulate people into buying products they didn't need (eg he made smoking fashionable for women by associating them with womens liberation!). he was also hired by the US government to help manufacture the consent of the US public in the various imperialist activities of the government in central america ie protecting the interests of the United Fruit Company against the interests of the people of Guatamala
If you're willing to buy from Wal-Mart over local businesses, then you'll get Wal-Mart products. If you're willing to buy unhealthy food, then you'll get unhealthy food. You can't really blame anyone for trying to make money by giving people what they want.
I'm not willing to buy from them and don't. I buy from local growers but due to the monopoly of the corporations this is not economically viable for a lot of people
See documentary 'Food Inc' to see how monsanto has bribed successive governments into legislating a monopoly for them over agricultural seed
A lot of peoples behaviour stems from their level of awareness and this can be suppressed by a missleading educational system and media which denies people healthy perceptions on things
If more people exercised a little more self-control, then maybe we'd have a better world. Of course, nobody really likes to hear about how they're actually to blame… it's so much easier to defer blame to the politicians and the rich, as if a more obvious pair of targets could ever possibly exist.
Well lets talk about 'blame'......the corporate press will tell yuo that the people to blame are benfit cheats and immigrants.....but who are the biggest recipiants if taxpayer money? The bankers of course! They have received vast 'bank bailouts' which have driven the real economy into a depression
The cost of benefit cheats are a drop in the ocean and they are simply following the example set by the elites. Even the British politicians have been shown to be exploiting the expenses system and everyone knows that US politicians are bought and sold by lobbyists and special interest groups
So if you want to talk blame then get lets get things into perspective
What about 'growth' in the environmental sectors? You don't think it's possible to make protecting the environment profitable?
I think a lot of the problem comes from the idea that we need constant 'growth'. Even if we all turn into obsessive recyclers and we make systems more efficient all that will happen is that we will consume ata greater rate. We really need to change the culture and what we prioritse.
Priorities are largely determined by corporations which despite large protests by the public (whether anti-war, anti-cuts or anti-corruption etc) basiclaly dictate policy and the direction of our economy
As for human exploitation-- if consumers were more interested… sincerely more interested in where their products are coming from, then maybe things would improve. Again, I would never try to justify unethical business practices and in many ways some of the things that businesses are allowed to get away with is disgusting, but on the other hand, there are billions of people who have been repeatedly told where their products are coming from and still choose to buy them. That's not capitalism's fault, it's people refusing to take responsibility for the consequences of their own actions.
There is still alot of ignorance about the impact of various things but as awareness has grown we have seen chnages in behaviour. For example boycotts of nestle, or dolphin unfriendly tuna or increases in recycling or people moving their money out of banks and putting them in credit unions but the agenda is largely dictated by the elites who create the consumer culture through the media
....so yes awareness needs to increase so that people can see the value of alternatives, trust that they will work and embrace them with a view to changing patterns
Idealism to a certain extent is not naive-- but when it's combined with narratives involving all kinds of sociopolitical experiments as if they were undeniable truths that couldn't possibly have any drawbacks, and that the only reason that these utopian ideas aren't being put into practice is because they're being suppressed by the evil elites, then yeah… it seems a little naive to me.
I haven't claimed these are 'undeniable truths'....once again you are trying to put words into my mouth instead of listening to what i am saying. These things aren't exact sciences and i am aware of the dangers of sweeping changes for example sweeping agricultural shifts by Stalin or Mao
What i am saying is that there are alternatives to the current systema nd that these can be phased in if people adopt them but in order to adopt them people must look outside the perception bubble created by a pervasive corporate media and that perhaps they must lose faith in that perception bubble by acknowledging how it is failing
Please read history to see how countless examples of popular dissent are violently suppressed by elites. I haven't used the word 'evil' that was you using that and trying to put it into my mouth
At the same time if you really do believe in this as some kind of solution, then there's really nothing stopping you from contacting a bunch of people, pooling your money together, and setting up some sort of commune. I've actually contemplated doing this myself-- there are places where land is still fairly cheap and where you won't attract attention. Lead by example!
This is already underway and i have also co-created a voluntary association of workers that will be the engine room of this project
Lessons other than 'communism doesn't work'? Other than 'a power-hungry elite will always inevitably seize control'?
Most of my cynicism has nothing to do with the media and everything to do with the real-life people that surround me. I don't think that the majority of people enjoy being treated with respect. I don't think that most people enjoy things like self-discipline, or challenging works of art, or subtlety… to be honest, I think that most people find them intimidating, and nine times out of ten the easy way out/most entertaining option is going to win. Is this because people have been manipulated into believing that that's what they want, or because the sellers have learned that that is what they want?
Bare in mind that these people are the product of a cynical capitalist culture....there is a better world and a better life out there for people
You seem to be assuming that the reason people aren't embracing communism is because they don't understand it, or because they're not being brainwashed in the right way. And with de-centralized power, how are you going to settle disputes between 'tribes' or 'communities' or whatever it is that people are going to be organized into?
I'm not talking about brainwashing, i'm talking about considering alternatives in the same way that you might pick up a different tool when doing a job because you know that the tool you have just picked up will be more effective than the last one
Delegates can be voted in by consensus democracy who are instantly revocable if they do not carry out the mandate given to them by their group/community
These delegates in turn can vote regional delegates from their number to represent them at a higher level. Disputes are less likely to occur in a non profit orientated system.
I can't impose my view of exactly how disputes would be resolved as these matters would need to be decided by the community when the system arises
I think you mean uniformity… unanimity implies free choice, ie: unanimous decisions, those agreed to by everyone of their own free will.
The unanimty created by neoliberalism is created at the point of a gun.....its like in the godfather films: ''i made them an offer they couldn't refuse''
See 'confessions of an economic hitman' to see how the US coerces political opponents into doing what the US wants them to do
I would agree the the capitalist aesthetic isn't exactly the greatest, but it is improving… and if you've ever been to a Communist country, then you would know that their aesthetic is a hundred times worse. There are a few showpieces, but most countries feature extremely bleak and hideous designs, and that aesthetic permeates the entire country and defines its mood.
No these are not 'communist' countries they are state capitalist, centrally controlled systems where the means of production are not controlled by the workers but rather by elites
Also, giving everyone stake in every single decision will slow things down tremendously. Not that I don't think that we shouldn't all be moving slower, just that with current technology it would be impossible to co-ordinate decentralized communities governed by endless amounts of wholly democratic referendums with their suppliers… especially in the absence of a central authority that can mediate the trades/exchanges to ensure that it's always 'fair'.
Whats the rush? See the 'degrowth' movement for arguments against the obsession for 'growth'
Technology such as the internet allows us the perfect means to coordinate things
How will you co-ordinate manufacturing with farming? Or prevent overfarming? Or co-ordinate suppliers and refiners and manufacturers in order to meet demands? How will you control the distribution of raw materials? Or prevent wastage? How will you decide which 'community' gets what amount of which other community's crop? Or are you going to farm absolutely everything in small amounts in every part of every country? Oh, but wait… how are you going to get everyone in one community to agree on how much they need before another community gets an amount that renders their request infeasible? Or are we just not going to manufacture anything? How are you going to prevent the creation of a black market with rogues from each community or tribe or whatever don't just steal commodities in order to provide other communities with what they need? Oh yeah, and speaking of the Soviet Union again, you do know that the Russian mafia grew so powerful from their black market operations (which inevitable extended to such wonderful things as human trafficking, child porn (basically legal in Russia), drugs, etc) that they basically seized control of the country after the collapse? The centralized economy did play a role in this but with your model I really can't see it going down any differently… the competition between communities for resources will inevitably lead to another black market, and things will be less stable/people will be less secure to boot.
I think its important that you recognise that all these ills are the product of capitalism....they're what we need to move away from
Humans are incredibly creative and great at finding solutions. Yes communities will face challenges perhaps you could look into
permaculture and
community-supported agriculture and
LET'S (Local Exchange and Trading Schemes) and the
Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) (
http://gen.ecovillage.org/) as well as the
World Social Forum for more inspiration?
I will try and discuss more alternatives in this thread
You seem to be talking about tribes. Regional variation is actually one of the main reasons why the US is so unstable… people may become 'cogs in the machine', but there's also nothing stopping you from quitting your job and starting up your own thing. You really don't have to depend on the big players in order to make a living…
What i am concerned about is a process that happened in Europe and followed the pioneers out to the wild west which is the usurption of control by corporations....hence the song 'Don't fence me in!'
The corporations are seeking to control more and more aspects of our lives
unfortunately, you do have to know what you're doing and be smart and also lucky in order to succeed. The only real problem that I see is that a lot of people want a sure thing without any risks, and they want it to be provided to them by the big players, mostly because they're the most stable.
Another way to put that is that most people want to get a fair reward for a fair days work. They aren't asking for much
The big players are not stable and bring constant boom and bust cycles and wars that suck people into them often by conscription....they are anything but 'stable'
There really is no reason why the big companies couldn't take a more active interest in their employees over the profits… but if you look hard enough, you'll find that there are companies who are like that, and who are willing to pay/take an active interest in people who can provide them with what they need.
Yes there is a reason why companies don't take more of an active interest in employee welfare and that is because capitalism is a profit orientated system
As a general rule the boss will pay the worker enough that the worker won't quit and the worker will do just enough work that they don't get fired. This is because the boss wants to increase profit margins and one way to do that is to squeeze worker pay
Not everyone can be the best website designer in the world… and if you think that that's what you are and you want to go out on your own, then go ahead and do it. But don't be surprised if you make the unpleasant discovery that you're actually not the master craftsman/genius that you thought you were… but hey, don't let that stop you from trying to improve your craft, or if you so desire, at least try to make it more profitable. That's capitalism.
I don't want to be the best at anything in the world, i am not putting any pressure on myself to be a 'master craftsman' or a 'genius'. I value experiences and i want an interesting and varied life and i've had one. Capitalism usually places barriers to that that can be surmounted but not everyone is in a position to do so
Capitalism is not usually interested in good craftsmnaship as it provides minimum build quality to increase profit margins and in order to ensure future sales it puts 'manufactured obsolescance' into its production
It also likes specialism rather than generalism as it likes to treat people like machines. It likes us stopping ands starting, go/stop, clock in/clock out, green/red... the whole time to break our flow....like binary....but we're flowing creatures that have always flowed with the seasons, we're not machines
It's not co-ersion at all… from a very young age most kids are told that the world is theirs and they can do anything that they want to do. There's nothing stopping anyone from coming up with a better solution to life than 'get a job, get married, buy a house and car, have babies'-- a lot of people fall for that sure but there are also plenty of people who do realize that they are free and can come up with their own solution. Capitalism does involve competition but it also involves a great deal of co-operation between businesses.
Cooperation is our natural state and it shines through even the harshness of capitalism
The world is not really those kids to grasp and the few examples of self made people are rare and also there is a question over whether that kind of attainment is even beneficial to the individual or to society in general
Perhaps we need to re-evaluate what the nature of success is?
For me success is leading an interesting and varied life, gaining wisdom and understanding, gaining autonomy and freedom and improving the quality of life for those around me.....capitalism can keep the titles or material trinkets
Its like colonel cathcart in catch 22....everything for him is either a 'feather in his cap' or a 'black eye' and i think that is quite a sad and lonely way to pass through life
I guess so since I can remember you got upset in a different discussion because you didn't seem to get my meaning, and then I was too exhausted by it all to correct you. So here's a question for you:
Where did you grow up?
Scotland
If your answer is a capitalist country, then no, I don't think that you really 'know' anything other than capitalism. I don't really either, but I have met people who grew up in communist Russia, as well as people from Nepal (in the aftermath of a war where a left-wing insurgency has recently toppled the government), and I can guarantee that stable capitalism is about 1000000000X better than anarchy or any kind of revolution… I visited there right after the Civil War (which would probably be the result of trying to impose this form of government on the US) and I can tell you that while it was a lot of relief, it was also a lot of simmering anger… I met kids of about 16 or 17 who were talking about picking up guns and fighting the Maoists, there were soldiers with automatic weapons on every streetcorner, usually standing amongst piles of rubble. This is about the only way to achieve the kind of radical changes that you seem to be supporting, and it's really not worth it.
No i don't agree that violence is the only way to achieve change
Look we are the workers. We are the dooers. We make things happen....not the capitalist class (those that live off their investments)
If the workers organise and coordinate their efforts and decide to down tools (peaceful non cooperation) then whose gonna cook for the fat cat? Whose gonna treat their ulcers, educate their kids, drive their cars, mow their lawns, fly their jets, function their businesses, do their books, fight their legal battles, make their clothes, grow their food or distill their scotch?
We hold the power....its just empowering people to realise that so that we can organise a better deal for everyone instead of one that impoverishes many and enriches a few
About the only way to move forward is to stop buying products that you know are contributing to the kinds of unethical business practices that you're so angry about… use your spending power against the 'ruling elite'. Become self-sufficient. It is possible.
Now you're talking! lol
Yeah boycotts, self sufficency all things i definately approve off! One of the best votes we can cast is with our money, but once again this needs people to be aware enough of the issues and of their options and of the implications of these and many peoples perceptions are currently moulded by the mainstream media which builds a bubble....a perception of reality that is corporate-centric...around peoples minds
I think that it depends on the decision… I would agree that including more people in certain decisions is probably a good idea, but believe it or not a lot of the most effective managers do precisely that. A lot of the most effective companies aren't overseen by tyrannical micro-managers who try to control every aspect of their employee's behavior.
This is called 'empowerment' in management speak. It is a ploy by management to give workers a sense of autonomy but really what the managers are doing is giving a little bit of rein out at certain points so that they can keep the mule pulling the cart and not shaking itself free or grinding to a halt
It is what Chomsky would call an 'abuse of language' because real empowerment would be for people to develop enough self esteem that that they understand that they can play a part in the decision making process and that they have value outside of a belittling corporate system
I don't know if it's sustainable, but I definitely don't think that it's time to panic or make assumptions about 'elites' or demand drastic changes to the entire sociopolitical landscape. I do think we need to keep tweaking things however and I wish that more people would learn to recognize the value of their own spending power.
Ok it sounds like you are a 'reformer' in that you believe in trying to bring about change by gradual stages...is that fair to say?
I think the problem with reformism is that it allows the elites time to adapt their strategies and to coopt dissenting groups. It also allows them to keep flogging the dead horse that is capitalism instead of allowing us all to try different things
Victories have been scored against the corporatocracy such as workers rights, holiday entitlements, 8 hour working days, free education for boys and girls and more rights for minorities.....but these have all had to have been campaigned for....they were not brought about by capitalism but rather brought about by the people despite capitalism