G-globalism is evil!!!!

i dont even know why "democracy" is among a list of charts like child mortality and extreme poverty
besides that, theres billions of people still alive today that are near fatal starvation for most of their lives, they die at 15 or 25 instead of 5, big deal - that isnt progress

...

this has nothing to do with "globalism"

this is thanks to the effort of multiple local governments

...

...

Honestly i wouldnt mind if a single world government nuked all their enemies to achieve global domination.

But that is easy, the hard part is keeping it stable since you know humans are autistic cucks who sooner or later will start fighting for power and divide the one world order to two and keep fighting like cucks

We need a system that will enforce global stability and no such divisions

Praise the free market :^)

We're all Jewish globalists here
You should take this to Holla Forums tbh

Yeah capitalism is great compared to what was before it. Marx agrees too. But at some point it will won't deliver improvements anymore and it will be time to move on.

China is facing rising rates of obesity.

...

This looks like a Holla Forums thread after you have solid evidence global warming exists.
wtf
You can't just deny all of this

...

Considering they're resorting to al jizzeera and global """""research"""" as citations, I think you'll find no real counter arguments here.

In truth everyone on this board is middle class bourgy LARPing anyway.

RIP internet.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.
Holla Forums argues the same shit about "global warmin" "research" funded by the 🍀🍀🍀jews🍀🍀🍀

Well, what is it then? It's no coincidence poverty rates started to go down shortly after industrial capitalism.

Nothing wrong with that, i like cuddly people

Can either of you refute the articles? I

I'm not refuting them, I'm agreeing with them. There isn't much to argue, they are simple facts.

Humans were inventing technology and developing medical techniques before capitalism ever existed. That kind of progress would happen with whatever ecnomic system was in place.

God almighty
I can meditate to this

The thing is poverty rates were constant for the entire history of humanity until capitalism arrived. That's the point of the charts above, they show poverty decreased only after the beginning of the 19th century.
It didn't happen with any system other than capitalism.

It's almost like technology increases as time goes on.
Also, the democracy chart is wrong. A republic with democratically elected officials is not a democracy. The systems have different names because they're not the same.

The point is that despite technology having been increased for the whole history of the human race, it was only with the introduction of industrial capitalism that poverty rates started to decline.

Which is a byproduct of market expansion. You can't sell shit to peasants. This isn't a reason to ignore the contradictions of capitalism or assume a better system isn't achievable.

I wonder, how does one deduce poverty rates if there's no statistics (which center around market exchange anyway, i.e. GDP per capita) available for the pre-capitist times?

I don't think anyone here would disagree with the fact that capitalism provides a better living standard for most than the systems that proceeded it like feudalism. Not living in extreme poverty is obviously a good thing, as is not dying before you're five but this doesn't mean that most people are having any sense of a comfortable life. More than likely they're just scraping by. The argument is that socialism would reduce unequal distribution of wealth under capitalism while retaining and possibly increasing its rate of production by eliminating control of the economy by a few and giving control to the many. Thereby allowing people to actually receive the value of the labour and not have to sell some of it off to the capitalist class.

You can't be this much of an idiot.

Wow that webm is so shit

t.pol

yeah because a subset of proles don't do physical labor, they do mental labor and primarily consume carbohydrates because proles only get paid enough to live.

"poverty has gone down"
see this post

capitalism can create better standard of living for proles by producing things (like cell phones) that are cheap relative to the base cost of living. but if the cost of food and housing is reduced while other cheap things like cell phones stayed the same, proles would no longer be able to afford them

It's still an improvement in living conditions. That's an awful excuse.

how? they went from being able to feed a small family to earning a wage to just feed themselves? it's a regression of living standards for most, but it's measured a a huge increase because technically they now have an income whereas before they had "no income"

Because there is no proof for what he's saying. If there is an actual proof saying how they have worsened their quality of life I will take it, but the argument as it is right now is laughable pseudo history in the same way Holla Forums engages in laughable pseudo science when it comes to climate change.
Also, keep in mind the chart measures this "income" by acquisition power, meaning the food you farmed to yourself is considered in this income.

Not really. See

elaborate.

There's also no evidence that life has improved, at least not directly. Only that the stats you've collected based on the criteria you define show an increase of something.

Even if life for these people has improved, the point is irrelevant - you now have more people living longer to be exploited, great job - you've just increased worker exploitation.

So we're celebrating what? That people have more comfortable lives, but are still doing shit compared to how they would be if they had the product of their labour?

It's only been good for the bourgeoisie, and people are still taking the spin that not dying so soon, for some number of people, (the rest living in poverty) is enough to justify an oppressive, exploitative system that sucks all the joy out of the people living in it. Living longer to be miserable. Celebrate!

no.
Republic is a form of State, Democracy is a form of Government.
Pretty much every single country out there is formally a Republic, the US isn't a fucking snowflake, you're thinking of Federalism, that's where you faggots shine.
stop spreading disinfo.

I place higher quality of living over human "exploitation".
It has been good for everyone between the bottom 10% and 95% according to the graph alone (which is factual, and I consider is a good estimate of living conditions). The remaining top 5% seems to do better as well, and I don't think the bottom 10% are doing worse while it's just a matter of time for them to increase their standards of living. I'm going to be worried the moment this graph stops declining, just not now.