Can capitalism go on forever?

It's even more absurd to pretend you can guess what the next system will look like.

yes, unless we do something

>export capitalism to the rest of the galaxy

Jesus Christ how horrifying

the only mistake bigger than communism is &Humanities

...

>le capitalism is ebil meme

that was not his question you sperg

...

>implying all other aliens wont be capitalist

>will the natural/default economic system last forever?

No system can go on forever

it will, until man has to leave this planet, people will get left behind as the ones with more access leave for somewhere that's not dying

Capitalism is just what we have decided to call the default human method for organizing a free, cooperative society. Nobody wrote a capitalist manifesto, there was no capitalist revolution that deposed precursor systems. So as long as human society is more or less free, there will be "capitalism" since that's just how human society works without some asshole trying to control everything.

Good thing he didn't do that.

>natural/default

...

Communism doesnt do that tho ;)

Forgot pic

Also

>inb4 tumblrfag strawman

I'm just saying. Nobody "thought up" capitalism. It didn't have to be "implemented" to take over the world. That's why to this day there's no codified "true capitalism", because it's not really an ideology. It's just a broad descriptor for the general way free societies organize their economies, and these societies only really overlap in the fact that they all grant their citizens a fair measure of independence and also have laws respecting property. That's pretty much all it takes for some kind of capitalist system to flower.

>Nobody "thought up" capitalism
Please be bait

>I'm just saying. Nobody "thought up" capitalism. It didn't have to be "implemented" to take over the world

Why dont u actually read Marx? He never claims that, he claims that increases in technological development interact with our human behavior so methods of resource distribution change over time

Im not a Marxist at all but dont be a retard

The actual natural state of man is to have all things in common, look at hunter gatherers

No

/thread

this.

don't get me wrong, primitive communism != communism, but early humans knew and historically overcame extreme hardship playing to our strengths, which is being social, coming together, and deciding what to do with ourselves / our resources, not at all doing what we do rn for the most part, which is acting like autists over "muh property".

Wrong, Great Ape societies are hierarchical. There's always an Alpha Male who gets the most shit, like mating opportunity/food. This is true for Common Chimps and Gorillas, showing that it is most likely a shared ancestral trait.

Hunter Gatherer societies are lead by a "Big Man."

there's a nice balance to that, but communist states are cancer

capitalist societies are that dynamic though, people funneling their resources to benefit their group, on a massive scale, it can work no other way

absolutely false m8.

hierarchy didn't really come into play in human society until (debateable, but) chiefdoms which came right before agricultural/settlements, but more so when settlements popped up. hunter gatherers were pretty egalitarian, and modern research into hunter gatherers that exist rn prove this true, along with historical/anthropological research into early humans.

even amongst modern hgs there exists structure. we know very little of mesolithic foragers actually.

> capitalist society
> people coming together to decide what to do with resources

absolutely bourgeois

for humans probably.

what do you think companies are? any association? investors?

The Big Man basically lived like everyone else though

Not him, genuinely asking, how does an organization creates for the purpose of accruing profit prioritize human well-being? Sure theres often overlap because healthy and motivated workers are helpful, but what about when theyre totally unnecessary? What do you think about the massive surplus population in prison for dumb bullshit?

>inb4 prison is all le degenerate subhumans

Like 17% of US prison population is violent crimes and thats already 50% of the worlds prison population. Those people are more profitable and less of a threat if they dont need jobs and are contained

having a FEW people come together to decide what to do with resources != people coming together to decide what to do with resources

Where is the community input? The worker's, who quite literally put in most of the work? Why do only people with capital have a (sizeable) say in the economy and our businesses? We don't exactly have socialism yet bb.

This is the part when someone comes in and claims that executives networking over coffee is worth as much pay as a million laborers work day.

Being incarcerated for committing crimes that society has put into writ and law as being counter to legality is not "dumb bullshit."

...

how removed are you that you think of all transactions that exist in this world as boiling down to a few rich people talking over coffee?

That's true. Nearly anyone can do manual labor, it's a physical ability.
The ability to come together and organize those million workers is not a common trait.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

Companies aren't made up of investors only you know

Why should we do something? Socialist systems have proven that they can't match capitalism in it's productivity. Which is what Marx wanted. Something proven both in theory and in practice. People are simply more productive when they're working in their own interest.
"They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work"

did it look as if those subjects were branching off of "companies?"

Yes

So basically, owners are at their best, capital multipliers, and workers are ones who create capital.

This tells me (and is shown in reality) that workers create capital, owners *at their best* multiply the result of it. So owners are dependent on workers. So why do they, as my esteemed collegue you quoted here, get to choose that they get the reward of a thousand laborers? Why can't this be put to vote, or even given to autists to calculate to see what their "fair wage" is, when scrutiny of wage is only given to the workers?

Facts: a company cannot exist or function without workers or a worker. A company CAN, has, does, and will operate, function, and succeed without a CEO.

So why do, again, those with capital have an unfair say in how we handle our resources compared to everyone else?

>So why do, again, those with capital have an unfair say in how we handle our resources compared to everyone else
Because if workers strike, there will be other workers eager to take the work.

You're basically describing why Unions formed, and why they work.

the people that invested the capital that allowed for the company to exist have as a group pooled their resources to benefit each other, and society at large

this is not at all rocket science

this is just a more sophisticated and complex evolution of the simple resource pooling hunter and gatherer example from earlier in the thread

>selling drugs because there are no job opportunities for you (or really owning anything the state doesnt want you to) justifies being thrown in a cage and doing work for pennies an hour/for free in the name of "skills training"

Not apologizing for big drug dealers i.e. the bourgeosie of the ghetto but the poor are purposely excluded from the economy so that they A. Prove themselves as valuable enough to deserve the right to work B. Try to flourish outside of the legal economy they are excluded from and either succeed in exploiting less successful versions of themselves or get arrested and be free labor for the state

Yes of course theres very serious board room meetings. In all seriousness I'm sure the lives of bourgeosie are genuinely incredibly stressful and alienating and I dont think administration is an effortless thing. I also dont think it's something only special snowflakes who went to business school are capable of and I definitely dont think it justifies the ownership of whatever is produced by those you administrate on behalf of.

confused senpai. so, owners of capital get to have an unfair say in how we handle our reaources compared to the work put in by workers because... if the workers stop working, more workers will just work for them?

cus you're literally just telling me the key to everything is still workers, even if they're dirty scabs.

All I'm getting from your response is that: capitalists hold their monopoly on the economy because the system they literally built encourages the worker who willfully undersells himself or purposefully lowers himself to that of the status of a slave.

not really an answer as to why capitalists deserve most of the pie.

>I definitely dont think it justifies the ownership of whatever is produced by those you administrate on behalf of
It is when that Administrator is the guy who has you hired in the company he or she administrates over so that you can make products for them.

It's not like the worker was just making girders by himself; he applied for the position so that he could make girders in exchange for capital.

>It's not like the worker was just making girders by himself; he applied for the position so that he could make girders in exchange for capital.

Youre right. And who owned that capital, how did they come by it? What other options does the worker have?

Because they're possessed of the ability to accrue the capital. They do it, because they were able to, either through aptitude or fortune.

A person whose only ability is to do manual labor hasn't the ability to obtain that capital himself, and must hire himself off to someone who is willing to share his capital in exchange for that labor.

If you're asking why life's not fair, it's because it isn't.

>What other options does the worker have?

Pool resources together with other workers, create coops.

>And who owned that capital
The person who acquired
>how did they come by it
it
Depends, they could have found it, invented it, or earned it by working their way up to earning it. In older societies, they could have had the ability to take it by force.
>What other options does the worker have
They can do their best to accrue their own, it's a free country. If you can't build your own empire, you may be forced to hire yourself out as a worker.

Some people just aren't able to go off and be entrepreneurs

this lies on the assumptions that:

the capital that capitalists own is rightfully theirs and isn't again, already a result of exploiting workers in the past

capital is a good thing to base our economy around if we want a just and fair society that rewards those who work

see above.
If life isn't fair, then you realize we can just end this argument with workers putting capitalists against the wall and continue "life not being fair" from that point, right? I like how once you get capitalists to admit that everything is a shit mess, they want you to sit there and continue to happily eat their vomit when you can just put a bullet in their head and do something about it instead.

extra good feels when you realize the mechanics of capitalism will keep pushing more workers to the realization that "life isn't fair" and that, although some will accept and work with capitalism despite that, the nature of capital and its need to accumulate in a smaller group of people, the amount of people who are in the "life isn't fair and my only option is to revolt" will grow faster and larger than the "life isn't fair, but I can take advantage of this situation under capitalism's rules".

shit like this is why communism will win.

>They can do their best to accrue their own, it's a free country
By seizing it?

>If you're asking why life's not fair, it's because it isn't.

Of course not, and utopian faggots are utopian faggots. But life being unfair doesnt mean we should never attempt to better our society.

Good idea, but the competitiveness of co-ops is very limited compared to that of corporations that can consolidate without consideration of the desires of their human resources. And this isnt aboit saying competition is bad or that it can, let alone should, be eliminated, it's saying that we already direct competition into particular channels that favor the powerful and not the harder working and more intelligent.

Im not saying 20th century Red-Despotism is the answer or that le ebig gay space gomunism is possible. Just that capitalism as it has existed since the early modern era is not synonymous with markets or production, is not a unique feature of human nature, and is not inevitable.

>Just that capitalism as it has existed since the early modern era is not synonymous with markets or production, is not a unique feature of human nature, and is not inevitable.
I never stated the opposite,.

Hate to break it to you, Comrade, but most Communists are the desperately poor. Middle class workers just want jobs to buy shit.

Nobody who owns a house and two cars is going to trade that in for a one bedroom commieblock and a monthly beet ration.

Communism cannot exist, because resources are inherently unequally distributed and scarce.

>but most Communists are the desperately poor
Nope.

I mean, you can try. Don't be mad if some hired worker shoots you, because some Bourgeoisie didn't want you too, though.

I meant a more legal method of investing and enterprise building, but you can try a violent coup if you want.

Yes. Just breed out the white race so everyone is a brown cow like /pol/ saysand then we can be mind controlled by George Soros and capitalism and freedom will be ours.

Polities that have been communist:
Russia
Eastern Europe
China
South America
South Asia
All of whom were populated by masses of the desperately poor. Peasants.

The only non-poor communists are the communist ideologues who use those peasants as pawns to gain power

Then let's not pretend the country is free by any means if we are all forced to play their games

The Freedom described by the founding fathers is the freedom to influence the Law by establishing a series of elected officials who represent the citizenry. It's not a declaration of anarchy. If you want to influence the law, you can vote for parties with ideas similar to yours, whom definitely exist, but are, understandably fringe.

It's unlikely that the majority of people are going to elect a guy who says it's okay to murder your manager at Starbucks, because he's oppressing the proletariat

I have capital, you have capital, we all have capital

even goddam cavemen had capital

the fuck is your malfunction?

if you own nothing you won't mind sharing everything.

>The Freedom described by the founding fathers

Yeah, and that's why the proletariat elected Donald Trump, because he offered them the opportunity to work for an income they could keep, while the desperately poor and their Academic slave drivers voted for Bernie.

again, assumes that: the divide between the poor and rich won't grow (false; we went from 8 people owning >50% world wealth earlier this year to what, 5 or 6 as of today?), that the middle class won't shrink (false; see US, see the profit motive encouraging business to outsource labor and even specialized labor to foreign states or to immigrants because they will work for less).

g e t f u k t, the spectre of communism is coming for y'all liberals.

>The Freedom described by the founding fathers is the freedom to influence the Law
>Freedom
Oh ffs

The Spectre of Communism is a bunch of losers in bandanas who can't beat a bunch of basement dwellers who worship a cartoon frog

man I thought I was in Veeky Forums

sure, I have the same capital that Cuckerburg has, which is why my dad stays up to 2am worrying about bills/retirement despite holding two jobs lol tell me again how workers wages can be compared to the money produced and used in scales I can only dream of by capitalists for business or to buy a second yacht

any day now
>y'all
shucky darn

Are your dad's jobs being the owner of multibillion dollar websites that people willingly pay for?

Yeah, it sucks that your dad's not a lucky bastard who happened to invent facebook. I know that feel, bro, but how exactly does his success entitle you to his earnings?

wut. I don't see how that proves that the "capital" that workers have is in any way comparable to the capital that capitalists own and use.

if you want me to ramble about my dad, tho', it says a lot about a society that lets a social worker and part-time retail worker break at the seams over work just so he and his family (he directly supports my grandma / my other grandma and the funeral / hospital expenses of my mom's dad, on top of everything else) can live an okay life desu. this is with me paying for my shit / car / minor house bills / school, too. I'm not a capitalist so I really don't give a shit about wealth as long as I can feed myself, pay for the shit I use, and have gas to go to gigs or enough for a few beers every so often.

Actually became and hit peak commie when we were more well off lol the state of the poor and the working class just really rustle my jimmies.

Your dad sounds like a faggot. He isn't owed shit by life and nor are you. You are completely responsible for your own circumstances and if you're not happy blame yourself.
Communism will always fail because of pathetic whiny losers like you

It's really sad how you consider owning a home and a car to be so luxurious and unobtainable by everyone, especially when there are more vacant homes than homeless people

>communist states
The absolute state of Veeky Forums

>the state of the poor and the working class just really rustle my jimmies.
Lol moralfag
Spooked beyond belief

It will last until robots take ower.
Then, people who own robots will own everything, rest of mankind wont be needed anymore

>ITT: People wank over Social Darwinist notions of how bevahe because they are experts in Evolutionary Psychology

>there are more vacant homes than homeless people
I'm sure you mean well but a lack of affordable housing is not the reason why the majority of homeless people are homeless

So you argue that there is no morality and nothing prevents his dad from taking up arms and putting capitalists agains the wall?

>Eventually, supply runs out
>Commies in charge of understanding basic physics

You know what non-renewable resources are?

A misnomer, all resources renew themselves given enough time

I guess all that helium will just float back down to earth, MRI technicians will be thrilled to hear this

While the general principles of capitalism will still be in place for this and the next century, what we will call capitalism then will be extremely different.

Sure, you will have private property and control of production by capitalists, management, and free markets. But who, and what manages who and what will be extremely different. The early throes of this change are digital economies, the slow legitimization of crypto, multinational mega corporations,vast automation, and the growing exit based-neo feudal re-organization of the commons. Intellectual rights will also be very hard to preserve, the shift to e-currencies and exchange will happen for that reason.

>exit based-neo feudal re-organization of the commons.
If I'm interpreting this correctly, you're arguing that for a cash out sum the common folk will vote for unequal rights for themselves?