Capitalism is just part of human nature

>capitalism is just part of human nature

there's already a thread on communism up you faggot

>he thinks humans evolved from rats

Then, why did the capitalists genocide the natives?

Why isn't the ownership of capital and use of currency to trade for goods prior to the 17th century capitalism?

>civilization forms in Mesopotamia
>proto-capitalism shows up
Is there anything sadder than leftypol?

This

>why isn't feudalism the same thing as capitalism
because they're fundamentally different social systems you cretin

>UG, ME HABS FISH. WANT SPEAR
>UG, ME HABS SPEAR. WANT FISH.
>ME GIBS YOU FISH FOR SPEAR
>UG
And thus capitalism was born.

that exchange more goes like they kill each other for looking at their side of the cave

>muh 900001 grabazillion

>South Korean massacres of Communists: 100,000

Okay, but there's literally absolutely nothing wrong with this.

>barter is equivalent to capitalism
lmao

Capitalism as a political system may not have existed at the time, but as an economic system it's clearly ancient.

It's using privately owned property to make a profit of some sort. It's by no means capitalism as we know it today, but it is capitalism.

its a bubble in the economy that leads to starvation actually

You're retarded if you think that's how primitive economies worked. Then again, a lot of economists do the same shit so who can blame you.

Goods for services is older than language.

No, it isn't.

Elaborate.

Wage labor, voluntary exchange, production mainly for trade instead of for consumption, production for profit, are historically speaking really recent developments.

All of those things have existed for thousands of years.

Not as the generalized way of producing. Not remotely.

There were purely subsistence farmers in Europe through the 20th century, that doesn't negate the fact that their wealthier brethren were practicing capitalism.

>bartering and trading didnt exist before then

Exactly. We don't pretend XX century europe wasn't capitalist due to outliers to the prevalent mode of production, the same way medieval europe wasn't capitalist because there were some merchants and wage laborers. And the further you go back in time the more ridiculous your claim becomes.

Socialism and capitalism are just buzzwords. Get over it faggots.

>bartering and trading is capitalism

So, the ancient romans, greeks and literally any other civilization in history were capitalists?

Is slavery more humane than capitalism? we enslaved people since the neolithic at least.

Why wouldn't they be? Let's ignore the idiots who think bartering is capitalism. Any city was filled with specialization, as people produced goods with the intent of selling them to others for a profit. All of those civilizations used money. Individuals owned capital. What more do you need?

The cities were all capitalist, and populous enough that writing them off as "outliers" is disingenuous.

>rome
>greeks
>ancient mesopotamia
>same economic system as today's
And answering your question, capitalism requires a model of production of merchandise that work in the following way:
>person A knows how to make something, or part of something, but cannot because it doesn't have the tools/machinery to do so
>person B have both tools and machinery
>person B pays person A to make stuff for him, person B sells stuff for X, pays person A Y wage
>The sum of Y,the replacement/maintenance of machinery/tolls, raw material, etc lower then X
>hence, person B makes a profit out of person A labour
>also, both A and B have to "freely" agree on the wage, work journey, etc etc etc

Anything different from this arrangement is not capitalism, doesnt matter how much you wished it was

What you describe literally happened in those civilizations. Blacksmithing, carpentry, and prostitution are all ancient specializations that turned a profit.

Profit is about trade, capitalism is about production

>communism
anarchy

Sure. Either way, capitalism is an economic system in which private owners control trade and produce for individual profit.

>markets = capitalism

600 gorillion

Yes, so? Doesn't explain why such radically diferent systems (for example, feudalism and capitalism) are the same thing because "muh property".
Would be the same thing defining electrons as "particles that have mass" and saying neutrons and protons are electrons as well, since they too have mass.

Except Capitalism is defined by private ownership. That's pretty much its defining quality. I think you guys must have some obscure academic definition of capitalism you all use, because it doesn't gel at all with the way anyone talks about it anywhere else.

>capitalism isn't part of human nature
>there is no such thing as human nature!
Choose one, bernout.

false argument. One does not have to believe in human nature to disprove OP's pic's statement.

Lemme spell for you
Capitalism is a model of production of goods where the means of production are privately owned by a group of people and everyone else sell their labour to this first group

Get it now? Anything else (People are religiously obliged to work, or are enslaved) is not the relation pointed above, hence not capitalism

Except when the kids of the victims elect a left-wing North Korean sympathizer as President - like they did in May 2016.

Again, what you describe existed in ancient civilizations. The potters owned their kilns.

There was no concept of private property in pre-industrial hunter-gatherer societies. If you were to claim a spear, a bowl, a tool, or whatever as your personal property, you'd get the shit kicked out of you by the rest of the tribe. They would see you as a thief.

Yeah, where they worked on their own kilns

Are you claiming it's only capitalism if the owners don't work?

That doesn't sound like it accurately describes what we see in primate societies

No, what I'm saying is that the people who make the stuff are, in the end of the day, not the owners of the stuff they make, the people who provided the machinery and the tools are

You should already know that most people in said ancient civilizations were farmers that didn't know their own land and paid tithes or worked in a form of ancient feudalism. A small amount of affluent craftsman doesn't mean the system as a whole is capitalistic.

And I've just realized my mistake. I always thought that people knew what capitalism is like and believed that it was always that way, but actually mosst people neither know what capitalism is and incorrectly think everything else is also what they wrongly believe capitalism is

>trade = capitalism
You're an absolute retard.

How would you distinguish feudalism from capitalism then?

He doesnt, capitalism is absolute and has always existed

Thanks for strawmanning me, it's very helpful.

This guy is correct, it isn't because a marginal part of a system of production has capitalist caracteristics that the system as a whole is capitalism. Only the core relations matter in this case.

It seems to me that the two systems existed side by side for some time.

I suppose if you want to restrict it to Marx's original definition, you're right. But prescriptivism doesn't really work, and it's not the way people talk about capitalist systems of economy in daily use.

Both are quite similar

If you're trying to imply communism is human nature, that isn't true either.

Sure, when people say "capitalism" in a daily use, doesn't mean the same as the definition. But, so doesn't "law", "contract", "rights", etc
Capitalism is a technical term, and people using it to express a diferent doesn't make it's technical meaning change.

world is only 6000 year old

The definitions I'm seeing seem, to me, to expand beyond the timeframe Marx put it in. That suggests that even as a technical term it has changed, which is unsurprising because that's the nature of language.

True, and that's what modern marxists do. But the core part of that definition (the relation between means of production, labour, employer and employee) haven't been drastically modified for nearly 300 years. When it does, capitalism will cease to be.

Capitalism requires Capital and a capitalist class to exist in free trade. Simple barter aint capital with your feudal lords and guilds around regulating shit and making the merchants mad. Ever asked yourself why the french and 19th century revolutions against feudalism was so violent.

Capitalism has wage labor.

>people seriously think capitalism is normal
Yeah man what capital did humans have pre-history?

mindblowing how people think capitalism is some natural state of human existence, let alone our modern consumer based capitalism.

In native american tribes you owned the tools you made and individuals in tribes traded with each other without any outside restriction. Tribes can share a locale, say a hunting ground, but not individual objects like jewelry and weapons.

i really like more capitalism than fedualism

Ya'll are missing the fact that humans evolve as societies evolve. Darwinian selection probably made humans more "bussinessman" than they used to be. The areas of the world were people were the most primitive have the people who have the most trouble adapting to modern economies.

capitalism is gay burgher money-grubbing turned into an ideology. Everyone should go back to annexing countries

The Free M*rket

The picture is so fucking wrong people have always traded their work with money (goods)

Now fuck off brainlet tanky