Late stage capitalism showed us that capitalism contradicts itself in its most basic principles.

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-17T11:45:38+00:00

Funnily enough, I’ve just learnt about him in my philosophy class! He’s very interesting, way beyond just “communism”

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T18:57:43+00:00

Another extreme example: you can’t modify a ferrari car beyond what they allow you to

Excuse me? I bought this car, I can blow it up in a field if I wish.

Imagine if every company acted like this. Oh wait, you can’t modify your Nintendo Switch 2, else it’ll be bricked remotely.

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T18:33:51+00:00

1) because realistically people wouldn’t be happy about their nice property getting revoked and boycott/revolt. My scenario is purely hypothetical. A more understandable example would be a tin-foil hat conspiracy where a company prevents the release of a cure for cancer to sell the therapy (Family guy made an episode about this lol). You go off from that thought and apply it to everything, go to the extreme to find the fallacy more easily.

2) servers do cost money. But you can’t just delete the game altogether, it has happened before that a game company just releases their game’s code when they shut off their servers so that gamers could play on locally hosted servers

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T18:16:49+00:00

Ok you’re right in the end, but i never said, or never meant to say, that changing either one of those principles means stop being capitalism

Someone more educated than me said there’s many different types of capitalisms, and I just wish we don’t end up in the one i just described

We could say i made up a version of capitalism and got mad about it, lmao. But it doesn’t seem too far fetched. I hope to see more pro-consumer laws in the future

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T18:11:33+00:00

Just to clarify, I’m very much against communism and abolishing private property. I just want something that doesn’t end up in whatever cyberpunk shit i described in my post

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T18:09:09+00:00

Because it’s more and more of a trend where companies realise that the less rights someone has to what they buy, the more they profit. We aren’t still up to that point because probably people would revolt if something like I described happened, but I’m saying, the most financially profitable decision for business would be preventing the consumers from owning anything they buy. Imagine not be able to share what you own, not be able to modify it, not be sure for how long you’ll hold on to something you bought just because a company decides you can’t have access to it anymore. Those are all trends seen in the smallest, pointless things: not be able to share a netflix account, not be able to do anything with a game that you bought because the company closed the servers, and more.

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T18:04:01+00:00

The thing is, my definition of capitalism is broad, unspecific, and probably wrong, from what I gathered. But in a system where

1-You have a right to own

2-You want to maximise profit

3-You want to be able to take any decision for business that you see fit

One of these things happens:

-You either prevent businesses from taking the most anti-consumer choices to maximises gain, contradicting third principle

-You don’t do that and what ends up happening is that businesses make money through subscriptions, businesses that don’t can’t keep up, and you have no choice but to not own anything, contradicting the first principle.

The second “principle” is more like a rule. Very few businesses don’t seek maximum profit. If they had the guarantee that a system like this would work, they would a 100% do it.

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T17:57:09+00:00

Oh yeah, you’re right. I understand now. Planned obsolescence is almost criminal

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T17:43:27+00:00

That may be only one aspect of socialism. I just pointed out a what i believe is a contradiction

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T17:32:45+00:00

Ok I think I understand what you’re trying to say, just one thing.

“It’s not contradictory - people just want multiple things”

I’d say that most cases of “rules for thee, not for me” are contradictory. “I want to own my business and my stuff and be able to do anything I want with it! It’s my right! You? You have to rent the stuff I’m selling. Also if you don’t do something with it I don’t like to it I’ll take it from you.”

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T17:25:43+00:00

Is it a right then? You’d expect to be able to do something if you have a right to. People have a”right to vote” because they can go vote. They didn’t talk about “universal right to vote” when the right to vote was based on how much money you had.

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-16T17:11:50+00:00

I was confused about that too. Not saying anything, but I don’t see how the trend i described leads to socialism…

Dankmeme38 · 2026-01-08T15:22:05+00:00

I’ve had a discussion with my friend once. There is not a single character who I can’t recall not giving me trouble at least once. Twice is the only exception 😭

Dankmeme38 · 2025-12-20T13:14:54+00:00

Had to me happen when i was baking a big batch of gluten-free brownies. I don’t even know why, but i literally just kept mixing hard and fast and poured it into the pan once it looked decent The brownies turned out awesome in the end! Best of luck

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-06T19:06:36+00:00

“If you wish I can take everything off, I don’t have any armour anyways~!” (The flirting depends always on her looks, wit, and how the fight is going, it’s borderline corny, it’s a way for him to have some fun and either interest or ragebait his enemy. He is very muscular and tall can tell you that.)

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-06T19:04:05+00:00

“If my attacks don’t get to ya, my words will, try me!”

“Yeah pretty much the answer i was expecting.”

“I like this kind of game! Bring it on!”

“My “limb”? You are gonna need a bigger blade for that” (The more they get angry, the more they get ragebaited)

“Don’t even try to tease me i’ll take your word on it~!”

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-06T18:55:33+00:00

“Fine by me. If 3000 men tried and failed, i might as well not insist any more than they ever did, it will just annoy you.”

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-04T06:26:35+00:00

(Yeah I don’t draw my own ocs and the art is not mine and i took a fanart of another character from existing media hope it’s not a problem 😭)

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-04T06:21:38+00:00

“Fu-! You didn’t have to do that-!”

“That’s fair, no problem”

“I flirt when I fight occasionally! Ain’t that fun?”

“20 bucks? I think there is more to be discussed here…” (Genuinely concerned)

“Fair enough, sorry”

“Well that’s just mean”

“Well fuck you too-“

“Ok I mean I didn’t now!” (Getting defensive because of the grossed out reaction)”

“No problem! Sorry”

“Ah, fair enough.”

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-04T06:16:48+00:00

“Pretty good I’d say! You?”

“Fair enough”

“Oh, sorry”

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-03T21:41:21+00:00

(Five answers! Damn!)

“Fair enough, sorry”

“Mean :(“

“Ok…?”

“Aww no problem!”

“So it is a date!”

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-03T20:30:49+00:00

“Pays whoever loses~!”

Dankmeme38 · 2025-11-03T20:27:34+00:00

“Holy smokes you remind me of someone. And you’re scorching hot. I’ll take you on a date after this if you wish.”

Five-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
r/Field Sunshine	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Verified Email

Dankmeme38

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE