Saying capitalism is the source of our problems will just make you look like a hipster liberal and will only confuse everyone when you try to explain further why capitalism should be abolished in dialectical terms. Saying however that CLASS SOCIETY is the source of our problems is much more efficient, as it for example is a much less controversial word, and will make it easier for you to debunk the human nature argument with some basic knowledge of history, instead of just saying "capitalism makez u bad n stuff".
Arguments in favor of "abolishing class society" will get you more traction than arguments in favor of "abolishing capitalism". Think about that. You effectively inject the core notion of Marxism once you get people to agree with this. I've had success with this and you all need to start too. Start slow and begin injecting the notion of class society, not capitalism, being the source of our struggles.
No, STFU opportunist.
But it's not just the class system that's bad you dumbass. It's generalized commodity production and the cycle of capital.
I just say the "the system" when I'm in front of normalfags.
why is there a thread like this every other week
Capitalism isn't just a class society, it is first and foremost an abstract system. You can't abolish capitalism just by getting rid of the bourgeoisie. Besides, we shouldn't let the risk of controversy dictate our discourse; we shouldn't allow bourgeois cultural hegemony to turn the very word "capitalism" into taboo language.
Using such a vague terminology is the surest way to allow the discussion to be appropriated by pseudo-subversives like populists, libertarians or fascists. We shouldn't be afraid to name names.
I did that with a conservative and said there are "other systems" that are better. Almost convinced him but he was drunk and forgot what we talked about. He still blamed poor people as just being lazy though. He had been homeless himself before.
This is actually a really clever tactic and I'm definitely going to use it. This is A+ work user this belongs on a fucking fridge. People tend to get confused when you bring up various isms.
Terrible idea. It goes straight into MUH HUMAN NATURE territory with a lot of people.
What about calling it "class apologetics" ?
A jog on the euphemism treadmill has never gotten anywhere.
What needs to change is the cultural connotations you are trying to avoid to begin with. Expose them as the petty propaganda they are.
op has a point.
as a kid when i heard people shitting on "capitalism" i just thought they were being dumb and unrealistic.
we either need to start just saying "neoliberalism" or "class society" that way idiots take what you have to say more seriously.
it takes a lot of reading through the lines of bullshit propoganda to understand that capitalism is the root if you grew up in the west. that its not hard to destroy capitalism if you just give workers the means of production and make private property (not personal property) ownership illegal through some sort of government restriction.
OP had the right idea, my friend. An euphemism treadmill is something else, like saying special instead of retarded, until the new name-tag takes on all the connotations of the old name because the thing the tag is on hasn't improved. Capitalism in ordinary language has a different connotation than the Marxist one, to many it is a fundamentally different concept than the Marxist definition and just means something like consumer choice.
The problem here is that in most respects, Marxists share the same definition of capitalism as mainstream economists because Marx helped establish the modern concept of capitalism to begin with. What most people think about is more of the same silly propaganda.
You're perfectly right user. We should abolish class society right now. Let's talk rather than struggle, let's have representative democracy with 1 man = 1 vote. Capitalism is fine, as long as we get rid of this pointless class war.
Here is how language works, friend: What most people think the word for an abstract concept means is what the word means when they say it.
If other people's initial perceptions are your biggest fear, you're literally being a lifestylist. Correctly identifying the workings of capital in our society can and should be done with a straight face.
All of the examples of communism had the bureaucratic class as well, they're needed to re-distribute the wealth. Also the working class.
Real communism isn't classless, only pie-in-the-sky anarchocommunist primitivists think classes can be completely abolished. But then again the same people think we can subsist without some basic numbered system to measure relative value of goods.
I'd say that this discussion is context based.
Most posters on Holla Forums understand the nature of capitalism to varying degrees, especially within the context of how this overarching paradigm is detrimental to most of humanity, again in various degrees and in varying ways (wage slavery, destruction of our shared ecology for the profit of very few, military/geopolitical history of the system, etc.). Amongst ourselves the term capitalism has a relatively well defined meaning and as such it can be easily used in discussion.
I would surmise that most people we will encounter in the first world haven't really taken the time to understand the system in this way - they grow up wrapped in the spectacle, and as such they view capitalism more as a system of fiat currency, going to the store and buying things, and perhaps as private property ownership. Their context for the term, their understanding of its history and of alternative systems has been intentionally downplayed our outright misrepresented. Talking about capitalism as something to be removed is, to these people, frightening - because they don't know what it means to live or think outside of capitalism.
For discussions with people who haven't come to terms with the system as such, varying terminology can be an effective way of getting them to stay engaged with the conversation. Class society isn't a bad term for this. Using terms like 'the establishment' or 'the elites', 'the ownership class', or as Bernie kept saying 'the millionaires and billionaires', really anything that conveys the sense of 'the people more powerful than you' is accurate, and something that people can pretty easily understand and accept - and that can be, at least in my experience, a good way of getting people who are not so politically inclined to question the state of things - because no one likes being powerless, and getting them to realize their powerlessness while identifying what the power structure of the world really looks like can be a good way to initiate people into questioning the nature of capitalism.
This is what ☭TANKIE☭s actually believe
That's more a term for "someone who believes in capitalism" as to differentiate from the capitalist class
Kneecapping yourself by saying class society instead of capitalism is a horrible idea. Sure, you should keep the confusing to newbies lingo to a minimum, but even normalfags who are open to anti-capitalism may have the idea that classes are an inherent thing that will simply just exist because human nature, and will need a good explanation of materialism before you delve into anything about classes, lest they just shut off to you completely.
Give people some credit. Even most normies know that capitalism is flawed, and the ones that don't are the ones who think capitalism is just 'b-b-but muh market, taxation is theft' who are balls deep in Porky approved bumper sticker ideology anyway
This is something I thought of and I like it I also remember the user who said that we should change bourgeois to 'commercial class' and private property to 'commercial property' renaming stuff is a good strategy
Call the words what they are. Just say capitalism. Read De Leon.
Saying "the system" leads to accusations of being a hippie or a conspiracy theorist.
This post is yet another attempt to replace socioeconomic struggle with identity politics. from the "class is identity" turds.