• lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a dumb argument. There are clearly better and worse ways to organize a society. There’s no reason to believe capitalism is the best and plenty of reasons to believe it’s not.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I haven’t heard of a better method than (properly regulated) capitalism. I’m open to one though.

      Communism and anarchism demonstrably don’t work, so don’t go there with me.

      Socialism I would consider a form of Capitalism (imo the best one).

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Saying socialism is a form of capitalism is…unconventional. I think very few people would agree. Personally I see socialism as something that can be blended with capitalism, but doing so results in a less capitalist system. And when I see someone advocate for capitalism, I assume they mean the mostly unregulated kind like you see in the US, and which is forced in a lot of poor countries under the guise of “economic development”.

        I consider myself a socialist so I guess we’re not as far apart as it seemed at first.

        But anyway, the point I was originally trying to make is more general: the best system might not even exist yet. In medieval Europe they thought feudalism was as good as it got, and ideas like capitalism and socialism hasn’t been invented.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with all of that.

          My view is, capitalism is an economic program, and socialism is a societal program, and like you said they can be blended. Pure capitalism would have essentially NO societal program (ie no regulations) and would look something like libertarianism.