What do you guys think of the horseshoe theory? Is it possible that by further democratizing the capitalist economy and decentralizing the means of production so that it belongs to people rather than big companies, we can eventually live in a society where commodities are really cheap or even free?
For example, if you take something as simple as apples, if you planted an apple tree in everyone's yard instead of having big companies sell you them at artificial prices and instead of forcing people to give them to you for free in communism-which-doesn't-work, then theoretically everyone will have free apples since everyone owns the means of production of apples right in their yard. What's wrong with this?
Ok, what capitalist in their right mind would do this? Or would it be on the government? What would they benefit from doing this? Dog so long as the means of production can be owned, none of these things would ever happen. The means of production won't just magically decentralize so long as somebody can profit off their ownership, that goes against logic so hard its not even funny. And you say communism does work, lol
I didn't say anything about seizing the means of production, if what you mean is taking it by force and redistributing it, if we're talking about 100s of years of theory and practice then it's obvious that rash actions like this almost never work.
Your normal every-day working capitalist. All men are capitalists, they benefit from having the means of production, the capitalists that own big companies and have a significant market share on things obviously won't benefit.
If you could generate free shit for yourself, instead of working for a capitalist, then there would be no need to buy things from capitalists, but this differs from communism or socialism since you don't seize anything from anyone and redistribute it.
Luke Hughes
Why is this saged? It seemed it could be a good thread.
Mason Bailey
I like this idea actually, the important thing is that the workers have the means of production, not necessarily that they take it
Gavin Perry
Yes, digital piracy is an example of a decentralized sector of the economy, the only people who are butthurt about it are the porky publishers who rake in all the money, while the developers find new and ways to fund their games (crowdfunding), this is also good in the sense that if a company is selling us products that we don't want (eg: EA/Ubisoft putting SJW propaganda into their games) then they will be forced to compete with the products that people are actually buying (the crowdfunded ones without the SJW propaganda that people don't like).
Take all of that and apply it to 3d printers, in 10-20 years you won't be buying your Iphone from porky, you would be making it yourself.
Anthony James
Ok, this is why we here on lefty suggest reading books all the time, why it is a meme. That is not the defintion, not even remotely, of a capitalist. A captialist is (from Google's defintion generator thing: cap·i·tal·ist ˈkapədləst noun 1. a wealthy person who uses money to invest in trade and industry for profit in accordance with the principles of capitalism. "the creation of the factory system by nineteenth-century capitalists" synonyms: financier, investor, industrialist The average person is a "proletarian". In modern terms, we refer to them as the working class. The difference between a capitalist and a worker is their relation to the means of production. The capitalist own the means of production, the workers must essentially "rent" the means of production from the capitalist class. This is not exactly how Marx puts it, but suffice it say largely describes the relation. Because of this relation, however, workers never see the full fruits of their labor, and the capitalists make money off of simply having a bunch of money to buy these things, and it results in capital accumulation with the rich and wealth disparity.
Now, having said that: So the primary issue with this is you are assuming the average proletarian can actually do this. Marx speaks a lot on this very issue. Before the industrial revolution, this was exactly how things played out. Families made most of their goods in house. Now, that has become neigh impossible given the division of labor necessary to do so. Do you need drugs for that terrible infection you have? Good luck getting your Phd in Biochemistry and synthesizing them. Need a car? Good luck mining the necessary ore, smelting it into car parts, getting a degree in mechanical engineering and then building the damn thing. You see my point? What you are talking about already exists for simple commodities, tens of millions of people in the US grow tomatoes, as an example. But that doesnt collapse the tomato market
To summarize though there are problems inherent in the capitalist system that cannot be solved by what you are offering. The means of production must be collectived. Since you have a lolbert flag I am willing to say you should really look into anarcho communism. It is not iron-hand state seizure of the MoP. It is simple collectivation within municipalities. Decentralized as possible and remedies all the problems inherent in your offering.
