Those who want to become United States Citizens, must go through this indoctrination and then take an exam.

@codewiz seems neutral enough except for the assumption of who controls what

@xerz Saying that "people" control businesses is deliberately vague so you can't argue with it...


@xerz @codewiz To my understanding capitalism does not equal to market economy. China uses capitalism in a planned (state) economy. Market economy is as old as the hills, but capitalism is a fairly recent concept.

@tagomago @codewiz it's a hard thing to argue about, some claim it *is* market economies, others that in addition money and/or private (as in, not owned by workers collectives/the state) ownership of means of production is required

@xerz @codewiz Money is also really old.

According to my small knowledge on this, I would say the heart of capitalism is the way you produce things, and how you see things from that. In capitalism, things are produced by private means, and the goal is to take the most profit out of anything you produce. That really made the world evolve into what is it today, from the Enligtenment era, transforming the means of production, and seeing the world and human resources as capital to be extracted.

@xerz @codewiz Now it has also evolved into hugely complicated financial oprations, so it's not only about producing things anymore, but it's the same concept.

@tagomago @codewiz I mean, that also seems what has traditionally been, it's only that the scale has exponentially increased due to knowledge and increasing wealth and life conditions

@xerz @codewiz But no, actually. Before there were not, for many many centuries, efforts on finding a way to improve the means of production. Also prices and rent were more related to tradition, the "most profit" vector wasn't there.

@xerz @tagomago Capitals were needed even in ancient history to fund large coordinated activity, such as building a church or fighting a war.

Capital exists in all forms of government, from monarchy to democracy, and in all economic systems based on money, including socialism (where capital is managed exclusively by the government).

@xerz @tagomago The Medici were a family of traders and bankers.

They multiplied their fortune lending money to kings all over Europe. They also lent money to members of the Signoria, thus manipulating their decisions.

This is one of the earliest examples in history of how capital can get too entangled with politics, leading towards plutocracy from any starting point.

@xerz @tagomago
In many modern democracies people can vote for representatives, but the candidates are essentially sponsored by those with money.

That's how you get unjust laws that electors had never asked for, and which benefit only Disney or Exxon.

@codewiz @xerz Yeah, exactly, that was just trade money. Commerce. There wasn't a production element, just "buy low - sell high". It was actually the change in producing things what made it. Changing the focus to production (not just machinery, but also techniques like chain production, etc.), make it private, think just about profit, and tagging it as a good self-regulating system (with the addition of market economy) that is perfect for human interaction (liberalism). It evolved from that.

@codewiz @xerz But that was thought of as "money", not capital, which I think are different ways of seeing the world. Capital (as in capitalism) is really more abstract, and has a very defined goal, which is more capital (profit). Not cathedrals. It's hard to tell, given that we live in it, and also it can get cloudy.
Also, many people would argue that socialism doesn't imply a government or hierarchies. That'd be regarded as vanguard socialism, or state socialism, or something like that. 🙇

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!