this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2025
1350 points (98.4% liked)

Political Memes

8708 readers
2315 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 55 points 2 days ago (16 children)

It's still called capitalism, but in reality it's drifted way off course. What we've got now looks more like a corporate oligarchy. The free market only applies to small players, big banks and mega-corps get bailouts, write policy through lobbyists, and face no real consequences for failure. It's capitalism in name, but the rules are rigged. Real capitalism doesn't have a reset button for the rich and a bootstraps lecture for everyone else.

[–] ILoveUnions@lemmy.world 34 points 2 days ago (8 children)

This is real capitalism. Real capitalism does not work

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago (3 children)

This is arguably one of the core components of capitalism that many capitalists choose to forget. Simping for the rich and powerful is not, itself, capitalism - capitalism is an innovation only enabled by massive government intervention in economic matters. Capitalism was not born with the first exchange of goods between people, capitalism was born with the rise of complex legal and financial instruments in European states in the 16th-17th century limiting the use of feudal and financial power.

The issue is that capitalist elites, like all prior elites, are not actually ideologues, whatever their claims. Capitalist elites are elites first, and capitalists second, if at all - the goal of elites is to preserve and enhance their own power, even at the expense of the system that enables them.

Capitalism is a touch worse at preventing elite accumulation of power than other systems (socialism), and a touch better than others (actual feudalism), but ultimately any examination which forgets that, no matter how ideologically 'pure' the analysis is, will always miss the fucking trapdoor to a more despotic and unfair system right beneath our feet.

Never trust the powerful. Any cooperation should always be conditional.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Mustakrakish@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago

Nah thats capitalism buddy, at its core. The point is the rigging, in order to profit as much as possible. Corporate Oligarcy is the ineveitable outcome of capitalism, because capitalism creates its own destruction after a certain point of wealth consolidation, after which point the system can no longer function as is after all the cannabalizing of its own sectors.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

We now live in the age of techno feudalism. The mega corps aren’t producing and selling actual things they are just rent seeking and extracting wealth from their fiefdoms.

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago (4 children)

The only way that capitalism could ever work would be to remove any generational wealth and make it only about personal achievement. When you die it all goes back to the state(assets and money).

Removing all inheritance was one of the items Marx suggested in The Communist Manifesto.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I've always toyed with the idea of a wealth cap. 1 billion dollars is the max amount of money any one person or entity can make. Anything after that is either reinvested, split amoung the workers (not the board of directors) or payed a taxes to the government.

One thing is for sure. We don't need billionaires.

How about.

Tax rate = 1 - exp( -const x wealth )

Const is chosen to maximize tax revenues.

[–] trxxruraxvr@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Even then, rich parents can pay for better education and tend to have better connections. Doing it that way would mostly just fuel nepotism in companies and encourage people to find loopholes to pass on most of their wealth before they die.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (17 children)

No, what we have is capitalism. There has been no veering off course. You don't know what capitalism is.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] Zink@programming.dev 12 points 2 days ago

In capitalism the goal is to use the money you have now to help you get more money in the future. If you can spend a few million dollars training your workforce or spend a few million buying corrupt politicians, and the latter nets you 10x the return in 1/10 the time, the system will reward those who make the immoral choice. And if you are working for a publicly traded company, your shareholders and board of directors will probably fire you for not using all technically-legal tools at your disposal.

I was recently thinking that the proponents of unregulated capitalism make it sound like natural selection for corporations. And it kind of does sound like that, until you think about it a little bit. It would be like an animal that grows more mouths as it finds more food, and if it eats even more food it can do magic shit like edit its own DNA and warp the laws of physics. Oh and of course it would be immortal, able to die from injury or starvation but never old age. (and if it did die from injury or starvation, it's probably so that its owner can sell its kidneys)

[–] AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.com 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What we've got now looks more like a corporate oligarchy. The free market only applies to small players

Tell me, how free was India to develop in free competition against England in the 19th century? How free was Congo to compete against Belgium? Oh, wait, you're only talking for a white minority, I see. When exactly was capitalism better, when English children lost their fingers trapped in machinery in coal-powered factories in England in the 1850s and died at 30-ish years of age? Maybe it was better in 1917, when the ambitions of capitalism and imperialism triggered WW1 and ground tens of millions of lives? Or was it good in the 1950s/60s when the US murdered millions in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Korea through the most horrific bombing campaigns just because they didn't want to be capitalist? What good capitalism are you exactly talking about?

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (6 children)

I'm sorry what? I didn't say anything about "good capitalism" or any kind of warfare or committed atrocious or any kind of racial issues.

In fact I am denouncing capitalism in my comment.

It's like you just picked a random line to quote then went off on some idealistic rant about literally nothing.

Jkf was assassinated, there's micro plastics in our food, I took a painful shit last night = therefore capitalism is bad!

  1. Strawman Fallacy Oh, wait, you're only talking for a white minority, I see.

  2. False Dilemma What good capitalism are you exactly talking about

  3. Appeal to Emotion English children lost their fingers... died at 30-ish

  4. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Capitalism and imperialism triggered WWI.

  5. Guilt by Association US murdered millions... because they didn't want to be capitalist.

  6. Red Herring The entire comment diverts from discussing actual merits or failures of capitalism as an economic system by listing atrocities as if they are direct and exclusive outcomes of capitalism, avoiding systemic analysis.

  7. Loaded Question When exactly was capitalism better...

Your entire comment is nothing more than idealistic mental masturbation, what a waste.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Free market capitalism has always been an ideological myth. The definition of capitalism has more to do with ownership of the means of production than anything about free markets.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 3 points 1 day ago

Capitalism hates free markets and will always strive to monopolise them.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

You're the first person to correctly use and define the word capitalism in this entire discussion.

Your analysis and critique is absolutely correct.

[–] tormeh@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's capitalism in the same way the Soviet Union was communism. No matter the theory, this is how these systems play out when real humans are in charge. That said, humans can clearly do better than the US system. Western Europe is full of counterexamples of semi-capitalism done better.

[–] HasturInYellow@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think capitalism could have played out differently if it were started from a different point. We started with aristocrats and never got rid of them.

Communism in the Soviet Union started through revolution which is often co-opted by strong men authoritarians. It ended up in a dictatorship. If communism were attempted in a different manner, then it would end differently.

[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago

There is no other goal in capitalism other than the concentration of power and wealth. It is the default setting and needs many rules not to get there(reformism).

At least with socialism society is fully democratic by having democracy in the workplace; the last bastion of the Elite.

One system favors the few while the other the many.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Unfortunately like every system we have tried to do at scale, capitalism favors concentration of power over time and being gamed by some folks or others. Humans love to surrender power to the powerful up until some breaking point.

So corporate oligarchy is an expected long term result of capitalism. Unfortunately some other type of oligarchy is the outcome from alternatives once the "wrong" players figure out the rules of the game and how they can break them as needed to get an advantage over those following the spirit of the rules

load more comments (5 replies)