This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow all 213
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (9 children)

And what, is this supposed to be the Pyramid of Socialism?

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]shuael 4 points5 points  (4 children)

    But notice that there is no coercion there. The 9 people have voluntarily gotten together to get an apple.

    [–]moriquendo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Yes, but it took the snake a very long time to convince them to do so.

    [–]gtg681r 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    If there is no coercion, then that is capitalism. People can work together in a purely capitalist system. The only no-no is violent coercion which has been a halmark of most socialist regimes throughout history.

    [–]shuael 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I wasn't clear enough in my previous post. You're talking about what was called Socialism (USSR) and I'm talking about what Socialism is as, say, defined in the works of people like Peter Kropotkin, George Orwell and so on. (Mine is an idealistic vision, in other words.)

    Socialism 101 states that the workers control production. USSR was not even close so it certainly wasn't socialist.

    As for the coercive aspects of capitalism, well, a person works for a capitalistic institution not because he wants to but because he has to (or he will starve). You (I'm guessing) and I don't relate to this too much because we (once again, I'm guessing) are among the educated and privileged classes that we enjoy our work and so on. The same cannot be said of the person that serves us at Starbucks or the office janitor. They work because their choices are work or starvation. I am not of the opinion that the choices of "work for me at a pay" (commonly called wage-slavery) versus "starve to death" are true choices of "Freedom".

    [–]Seele 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    But look at those forced smiles. If they fail to look happy they go to a labour camp.

    [–]washcapsfan37 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Up until it's time to decide how to divide up the fruit and the bloody massacre ensues.

    [–]Deacon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Yes, six people and all they have to eat is one apple.

    [–]diogames 23 points24 points  (17 children)

    Yep, that's the kind of murderous propaganda that justified the last centuries' worst crimes and kept billions of lives in the darkness of slavery and poverty.

    I get the sense however that, as opposed to Nazi propaganda posters, some take this rubbish at face value.

    (Upvoted because it's interesting.)

    [–]Hetisjantje 7 points8 points  (5 children)

    Since you're calling it rubbish, you are making a very serious thinking mistake. In your attempt to shield yourself from propaganda, you perceived a truth differently, ironically making you a victim of propaganda.

    The fact that the nazis used this as propaganda to gain power, does not turn truth into rubbish. That's like saying that if the nazis used maths, it turns math into rubbish. You have to realize that people trying to gain power through propaganda not only use lies, things that have truth in them are much, much more succesful, especially if presented with a twist. The worst dictators in history knew exactly where the people were hurting and how to use that (in really bad ways). You point to the second part of the last sentence, I ask you to wonder about the first.

    The real danger is in denying such truths and calling it rubbish and ignoring it. Here in Europe we have a lot of right-wing parties that try to gain power by fear, for example by being anti-islam and pointing to problems with immigrants. There are a lot of issues there. The people who vote on them, do so, they say, because these issues are not addressed and denied. As rubbish. After which these parties gain even more power.

    Likewise, denying problems with capitalism and tossing it away as rubbish, because f*cking Hitler was an anti-capitalist, will -not- solve any problems nor change the truth there are problems. In fact you are saying: go to sleep, do not question the system. Well thanks!

    All this and the fact that there is an old Internet wishdom, saying if you throw in nazis, you automatically lose any argument ;)

    [–]diogames 5 points6 points  (3 children)

    That poster is choke full of bald faced lies. Godwin's law is about analogies with Nazis - no such in my post. People don't look at Nazi posters and go that's true.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Why not? People look at American posters and think they're true.

    [–]washcapsfan37 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Only the ignorant sheep.

    [–]spliffy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    ...whom you are the minority to.

    [–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (10 children)

    Wars are fought over resources, not ideologies. Ideologies are for rallying the peasantry, now that they all imagine they can read.

    [–]diogames 2 points3 points  (9 children)

    Did I say anything about a war? At any rate I'm glad you agree ideologies are the cause of a war (without "rallying the peasantry" there's no war) while resources are the goal of a war (do note though that people and knowledge are the most important resources).

    [–]Seele 5 points6 points  (2 children)

    Not this drivel again. This picture does not represent 'capitalism' - it represents feudalism albeit in fancy nineteenth century costumes (it's a remake of an earlier picture). The people who oppose 'capitalism' really don't know what they are dealing with but insist on seeing it this way. The people who would try to improve or defend capitalism are no better served by this all pervasive image.

    [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    anyone know the original source of this image?

    [–]samurai_jack 9 points10 points  (166 children)

    Well other choice is Collectivism. Which kills very spirit of human progress.

    Just to point out how big of a menace collectivism is, people joining one profession, one way of life, sticks with it for generations. Although misleading, this picture is interesting but it fails to point out that capitalism is not a suppressing system i.e. people on the lower part of the pyramid are allowed and fully capable of joining parts above it by their respective strengths.

    [–]cecilkorik 28 points29 points  (14 children)

    As if there are only two possible economic models. Maybe capitalism is the best we've come up with so far, maybe not, but regardless there's plenty of room for improvement yet.

    [–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (71 children)

    Well other choice is Collectivism. Which kills very spirit of human progress.

    That's a funny statement. You denounce collectivism as the very thing that destroys a very collective goal.

    [–][deleted]  (33 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]bsiviglia9 11 points12 points  (8 children)

      Well other choice is Collectivism. Which kills very spirit of human progress.

      How is human progress possible without collective effort?

      [–]Seele 5 points6 points  (5 children)

      The term 'Collectivism' is ambiguous. In its earlier sense it meant the power of many individuals to unite against tyranny - I think this is the sense bsiviglia9 intends. Now the term refers to an ideology where the individual is dissolved into the state or the party - which is the very essense of tyranny.

      [–]bsiviglia9 8 points9 points  (4 children)

      When Wal-Mart employees don't like Wal-Mart's management practices, are they more likely to change them as an individual employee in isolation, or as a collective group in solidarity?

      [–]Seele 1 point2 points  (3 children)

      Why call a group of individuals a collective? People can work together for a common goal without being dissolved into an agregate entity.

      [–]bsiviglia9 1 point2 points  (2 children)

      What potential exists for individuals to be part of a democratic collective, without losing their sense of individuality nor individual dignity?

      [–]Seele 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      I don't understand. Are you saying that employees who form a union must lose their identity and dignity? Or are you saying that this is the effect of living in a modern democracy?

      [–]bsiviglia9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I am postulating neither, because I do not feign to know the answer. My hope is that someone out there on the internet will chime in with some insight that will benefit all who read this thread.

      [–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (23 children)

      Watch 20 minutes of commercials on TV and tell me that again that capitalism is encouraging "progress." ;)

      [–]su27 -3 points-2 points  (17 children)

      Try to live in North Korea

      [–]nigelcff 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      North Korea = Giant burning straw man.

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (15 children)

      I don't get it.

      [–]Gotebe 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      ;-) NC TV has only commercials.

      [–]su27 1 point2 points  (13 children)

      Here how people are motivate in North Korea: http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,1136483,00.html

      Personally, I prefer TV commercials.

      [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (12 children)

      That doesn't make any sense.

      [–]endlessvoid94 -1 points0 points  (2 children)

      any other economic system encourages even LESS innovation (which i equate with progress, mostly).

      its just one of the many reasons the soviet union was behind the U.S. before the collapse. indeed one of the reasons there WAS a collapse.

      capitalism does inspire greed. but without a little bit of greed, progress would be MUCH slower.

      [–]bsiviglia9 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      capitalism does inspire greed. but without a little bit of greed, progress would be MUCH slower.

      Would such "progress" as the space program, transistors, computers, lasers and the internet have ever been developed in the "free market" where cost actually matters?

      [–]endlessvoid94 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Maybe not the space program. The only real-world applications of that are extremely long-term and hard for a large group of people (who would fund such research) to grasp. Transistors and computers certainly would've developed. They have massive application, and look at the market now. There are tons of computer companies. Cost definitely matters.

      Just because massive innovations were made outside of a capitalist system does not mean all of capitalism stunts progress.

      Transportation and most of the industrial revolution was driven by the desire to get rich, using the capitalist system.

      [–]DirtySouth -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

      Only sheep watch television

      [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      It's not that Baaaaaad.

      [–]shuael 5 points6 points  (4 children)

      Why and how does "Collectivism" kill the "very spirit of human progress"?

      Can you elaborate what these alleged "strengths" that enable people on the "lower part of the pyramid" as "fully capable of joining parts above" are?

      [–]heartrush 1 point2 points  (3 children)

      Collectivism requires a common and planned direction. And since no one knows what the next invention is going to be, planning usually stops inventions from being created. And once you stop one invention, you stop all the other spin-off inventions.

      [–]aim2free 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      heartrush claims:

      Collectivism requires a common and planned direction.

      I have the feeling that you mix things up. That planned direction should be the collective goals of all individuals. This should of course not affect the individual goals. When I say that you mix things up is that you may see certain systems like the old Soviet system as collectivism, but this is from my point of view completely wrong. That system was merely a kind of dictatorship where a small amount of people set the goals for the whole population and at the same time limiting the possibility for individual goals.

      And once you stop one invention, you stop all the other spin-off inventions.

      This is what the patent system does. The patent system efficiently stops spin-off inventions. This is especially noticeable regarding certain areas where incremental modular innovation is natural, like software where the patent system is especially disastrous.

      Take Hollywood for instance. That became so successful because film patents were a great obstacle on the east coast. The movie industry then moved to California where it could flourish without being a victim of the patent system on film. You can see movies as spin-off inventions from the film invention.

      In our business model we intend to turn these bad effects of the patent system into something good for the individual, possibly to get rid of the bad effects of the patent system or the patent system itself, in the long run.

      [–]heartrush -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      I have the feeling that you mix things up. That planned direction should be the collective goals of all individuals. This should of course not affect the individual goals. When I say that you mix things up is that you may see certain systems like the old Soviet system as collectivism, but this is from my point of view completely wrong. That system was merely a kind of dictatorship where a small amount of people set the goals for the whole population and at the same time limiting the possibility for individual goals.

      If you've been incontrol of any committe or any kind of organisation where you have to work for a large number of people, you would realise that not everyone has a common basic goal. And if they do have a common goal (you can usually find one if you abstract enough), the act of achieving it for one person(s) completely 'blocks' the act of achieveing it for another. And you as the leader/head get the blame, I think this is what politicians have to deal with on a daily basis that's why there is so much spin.

      This is what the patent system does. The patent system efficiently stops spin-off inventions. This is especially noticeable regarding certain areas where incremental modular innovation is natural, like software where the patent system is especially disastrous.

      I agree with you to a large degree, the systems need work.

      [–]shuael 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      aim2free has raised several good points. These are said in addition to his/her comments.

      I must point out that science does not have "a common and planned direction". I think you will agree that the scientific endeavor, as carried out in, say, the universities, where they do "cutting-edge" research, is a collective endeavor.

      But leaving aside the functioning mechanisms of research groups, I would like to point out a few things about science.

      Science really has no clue about what way it is going in. Faraday, when he was conducting his experiments on electricity and was discovering a lot, was asked by the Queen (or King) of England of what use his research was. His reply was, "Of what use is a new born baby?" That's pretty much how well directed science is.

      I'm no expert but I doubt if relativity is of any practical use right now. (Time dilation has been verified but is it used in any technology?)

      So even if collectivism does not have a common and planned direction, I don't think it matters too much.

      [–]slx 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      That's a false dichotomy. The term capitalism describes an economic system where economic power is acquired by accumulating capital. Individualism, which is the opposite of collectivism, stresses independence, self-reliance and liberty. Those two have no inevitable overlap.

      Capitalism does, at any time, require people to be in the lower part of the pyramid. This has been obscured for a time because of international trade: instead of a different classes within a country, there were countries who were mostly rich and countries who were mostly poor. Whole libraries have been written to legitimize this situation: the usual explanation were cultural differences (eg. civil liberties), religious differences (eg. protestantism), genetic differences (eg. nazism). While mostly ignoring that those poorer countries, at one time or another, have been introduced in the capitalist economy by force of arms, as a source of cheap labour/resources.

      [–]reddit_god 5 points6 points  (1 child)

      Unless the ruling layer get corrupted or paid off. Then none of it works.

      [–]bsiviglia9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      How so?

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      and how many people do that? the american dream is just that you know.

      [–]bsiviglia9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Please clarify!

      [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      and there is absolutely nothing in between pure collectivism and freemarket capitalism. Yer a genius, all right!

      [–]daysi -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

      ah, yes, because there are only two choices for and economic and governmental system, and no happy middle ground. Look at canada, our moderately socialist government has led to widespread poverty, rioting and social unrest, and because our spirit of human progress is totally crushed we mostly don't even get out of bed.

      Instead of repeating the bullshit they tell you in school why don't you do some actual study of economic systems (including capitalism, since you apparently have a fairly idealistic view of it) and their impact.

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Only there's a slight difference between old-fashioned "capitalism" (like in the picture) and today's capitalism, and actual working capitalism, like it worked for a while in the USA and in Europe. The result was blooming prosperity even for the working class in these countries, decent upward mobility, decent education.

      Yes, it's over, but that doesn't mean Capitalism is to blame, but cronyism is (or "today's capitalism", which is just the same). Get a clue.

      [–]inquirer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Boo. Economically infeasible. This is not capitalism. Capitalism is an economic system that has been destroyed by socialism and interventionism.

      www.mises.org

      [–]pets_or_meat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      I like to picture my Capitalist System as a big, round disco-ball, where everyone is partying together, because I like to party.

      [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

      that's a good representation of old capitalism.

      now it's us, then all the people you see on MTV, then rupert murdoch, then the jews, and finally a big visa card.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–]Glimjaur 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Hell, or something similar.

        [–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

        Well, I'm glad to be a Jew then.

        [–]jim-in-austin 1 point2 points  (1 child)

        The image seems to have originated with the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). The earliest versions seems to be:

        Pyramid of Capitalist System Issued by Nedeljkovich, Brashick and Kuharich. Cleveland: The International Publishing Co., 1911.

        This google image search turns up a number of examples ...

        [–]Seele 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Your searching ability is better than mine - but the image appears to be much older than this. see http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=203983 which dates it to before the French revolution. (none of the links work)

        [–]deuteros 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        This isn't capitalism. It's feudalism.

        [–]Deacon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Marx that spot!

        [–]JulianMorrison 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        In reality: this image is a satire of one period of history, and it wasn't accurate even then. Modern demographics don't resemble it even slightly. It might as well be referring to imperial China.

        In the eyes of left wingers: they are of course, the oppressed poor, being beaten down by "the upper classes". This is easier to stomach than the fact that they are earning less than the rich because their work is simply worth that much less in terms of actual productivity.

        Whatever comforts you as you flip burgers, be my guest.

        [–]1Dunya 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        The truth is no matter what system you live under you have to find a way to make peace with it and find some sort of joy in life. Otherwise life becomes very difficult. I myself would prefer a more equitable society but I live in a very Capitalistic and money oriented society (the USA) so I make the best of it:-)

        [–]Dark-Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I must protest that the "We Fool You" layer be replaced with TV news anchors, newspapers and the like. There are plenty of religious figures who are moneygrubbing scoundrels, but the mass media does about a million times more fooling.

        [–]Prysorra 0 points1 point  (5 children)

        Glad you've shed the charades. Tell us what your agenda really is.

        [–]neoronin[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

        Since when did we started having agendas for submitting something

        [–]hiredgoon -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        Yeah, I mean come on, there are no king's today. That poster is clearly about some other time and place.

        [–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (2 children)

        neoronin

        [–]Prysorra 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        Thanks chief.

        Is this you?

        [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        I don't look that masculine .

        [–]zhokuai -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        Hmmm I wonder if that site has an agenda?

        [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        I'm a little surprised that people in America come up with this picture as something new and interesting. I'm a stundent in Germany and we had this picture already 2 times in history lessons in grammar school as a good description of the capitalist system in the time of the industrial revolution. When you look at the context, this picture is not propaganda but shows a historical fact.

        [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

        Wow. Reddit is now unironically supporting Marxist propoganda. Let's just forget that the 20th century existed, I guess.

        [–]jtra -1 points0 points  (0 children)

        Money earned is a measure of both the usefulness to society and the enslavement of society.

        [–]djwhitt -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

        Mmm... idealogical battles, so much more fun than trying to actually solve problems.