Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Mo_reese]

“Under capitalism we are ruled by the worst among us, while the living saints of our society toil without recognition in our hospitals, schools and slums. In our status quo systems there is no money in the pursuit of goodness and no goodness in the pursuit of money; it is those who pursue money above all else who wind up on top, and they have no goodness in them.
This, plainly, is unsustainable.” (Caitlin Johnstone)
Capitalism crashed resulting in the Great Depression.
The New Deal put major controls on capitalism resulting in the greatest middle/working class in history. The wealthy immediately started chipping away at the controls.
Also Pres Reagan declare an open war against the unions and many social programs aimed at helping the less advantaged.
Up until Pres Clinton is was just the Republicans that wanted “freedom” from controls but Clinton joined with Newt Gingrich to kill the regulation separating investment companies from people's savings banks. (Bringing the bank crash of 2008). They also punched the working class in the gut with NAFTA, moving US jobs overseas and to Mexico.
Corporate subsidies and bailouts became a major part of corporations' business plans as the corporate execs took enormous pay and bonuses, with kick-backs to their favorite politicians.
The Wealthy Class bought control of the mainstream media which became evident by the media's 100% partnership with both political parties in the Big Iraq WMD Lie.
Year after year the wealthy gained more and more power until the Wealthiest man in the world bought the presidency of the US for Trump.

Capitalism is empathy-less and abhors democracy. It thrives under dictatorships but remains unsustainable as the wealth and power moves to fewer and fewer people.

It's not that the Wealthy want us peons to die, they just don't care if we do.

[Good_Egg]

Seems to me that the electoral success of DJT says nothing about capitalism but a lot about democracy.

Capitalism is empathy-less and abhors democracy. It thrives under dictatorships but remains unsustainable as the wealth and power moves to fewer and fewer people.

Obviously there is no empathy in capitalism or communism or any mix of the two. Or in dictatorship or democracy. Only individuals feel empathy.

There is a well-known tendency for capitalism to collapse into monopoly. Maintaining a healthy competitive market requires government action. (The state, of course, is an absolute monopoly to start with).

Your complaint about a cartel of media owners may well be valid. But it seems to me that what we're seeing with the rise of the internet - YouTube and bloggers - is a decline in people's reliance on traditional media. So it's hard to argue that monopoly or abuse of monopoly power in media is worse than previously ?

There also seems an odd tension between pro-democracy feeling and the idea that the electorate are so stupid and lazy that their votes can be bought by anyone with money to spend on glossy media.

[Mo_reese]

Obviously there is no empathy in capitalism or communism or any mix of the two. Or in dictatorship or democracy. Only individuals feel empathy.

You are right. But I think that empathy gets in the way of the profits of capitalism

There is a well-known tendency for capitalism to collapse into monopoly. Maintaining a healthy competitive market requires government action. (The state, of course, is an absolute monopoly to start with).

Agree that unregulated capitalism morphs into monopolies killing the "free market" myth.
Some things like police dept., fire dept., utilities, etc. do not lend themselves to competition and need to be closely regulated.

Your complaint about a cartel of media owners may well be valid. But it seems to me that what we're seeing with the rise of the internet - YouTube and bloggers - is a decline in people's reliance on traditional media. So it's hard to argue that monopoly or abuse of monopoly power in media is worse than previously ?

Yes, the monopoly of the media worked well for the State to hide the war atrocities of the Iraq War but I believe they were shocked at the public outcry from the free access to the horrors of Gaza. Of course the wealthy stepped in to try to quell the outrage by buying up Meta, Twitter and TikTok.

There also seems an odd tension between pro-democracy feeling and the idea that the electorate are so stupid and lazy that their votes can be bought by anyone with money to spend on glossy media.

I agree and our founders worried about that. The House of Reps was intended to be made up of representatives of the non-wealthy class but the wealthy bought their way in. Also, I think it was intended to foster a well educated electorate but that's been destroyed by the wealthy.
{/quote}

[Gertie]

The UK mirrored the US model, without  perhaps some of the sharpest capitalist edges .  Our post WW2 Labour government re-built on a leftist model, creating state  institutions and nationalising essential industries.  There was something of a national consensus until the Thatcher era, Thatcher saw a fellow traveller in Reagan, and adopted Friedman's Chicago School monetarism.  Whilst also selling off council housing, nationalised industries and limiting trade unions' ability to disrupt employers. A famous quote of hers being ''There is no such thing as society''.

This became the new normal, eventually largely accepted by the Left under Blair's reformed 'New Labour', which was  Third Way neo-liberalism he shared with Bill Clinton.  Which brought us to the rise of the Far Right as the only alternative to the neo-liberal decline in wealthy western nations in the face of the economic challenges of loss of empire and globalism.  Imperialism had been corporatised, and emerging economies could undercut even huge protectionist economic blocs like America and the EU, under loosely regulated market capitalism. (The UK threw away even that much economic protection under pressure from the Far Right when it Brexited).

Now the fragility and failure of the neoliberal consensus has been put in stark relief, and we're facing the reality of late stage capitalism.   The UK's Labour Party finally got into power again as the country crumbled around us, only to retain the status quo, hoping to patch  it up here and there by applying more Austerity to all but the wealthy.  And turning the country against them, as they voted for an alternative, not this.  So what alternative is there for voters?  The Far Right Reform Party which is displacing the Tories.  

The Reform Party is basically Trumpism, and just as nasty, craven and stupid.  Relying on appealing to nationalist tribalism and our worst instincts, above compassion, policy and good sense.  Fuelled by the media, old and new, which  they increasingly use to set the political agenda and rile up hate for scapegoats to distract from the realities of their policies which only benefit the wealthy.   This is the way the media manufactures consent in a democracy, and when it's owned by billionaires and huge corporations, their interests will be prioritised. 

We had a chance for a real Left alternative, when Corbyn slipped through the Labour Party machine's net and became Leader by the grassroot membership vote.  And he nearly won the General Election.  Despite the all out war of the media against him who saw the real threat to their interests, and most of his own Labour MPs.  That chance has gone.  Now we're ****. 

You can see a similar pattern across the wealthy west and the rise of the Far Right. On top of this resource extraction and the infinite growth model capitalism relies on is causing us to be persuaded to ignore the existential threat of climate change. The war in Ukraine hinges on access to mineral resources, and the genocide in Palestine is fuelled by access to 'prime real estate'. We're already in very dangerous territory.

[Mo_reese]

Very well said Gertie. In the case of the US though we have Trump who values cruelty as much as wealth. He is a result of the US culture of Bullying. He enjoys destroying things because he can and he has the backing of the bigger bully in Musk. This will not end well. The wealthy class are afraid of him and have mostly acquiesced. He is the poster-boy of the collapse of capitalism as he is intent on killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

[Gertie]

Yes Trumpism has embraced  the ideology and aesthetic of self-interest and moral nihilism more openly and crudely than  western leaders generally.  

Neo-liberalism realises it needs a stable system to operate within, the Far Right  are care-less anarchists who cannibalise.   But it turns out that aesthetic sells,  and many Trumpists   revel in  'Vice Signalling'.  As long as   you throw in hate figures as the dehumanised 'other' to make them  feel good or victimised and therefore justified.  People wear their Maga hats proudly, unified not by policy, but in their hate of immigrants, trans people, libtards, commies, sjws, or whatever  flavour of the month their Strong Man Daddy   points to which serves his purpose that day.

Look at how the sacred cow of Free Speech goes out the window if its directed at 'the other'.  There are no values, no red lines,  and that's not what the sales pitch relies on.  Cannibalising the golden goose is as far as the Far Right leaders' greedy eyes can see. 


But I don't think that's in essence much different to the Far Right in Europe. Here they have to tiptoe around the aesthetics a little more carefully.  But they're learning from Trump that maybe not that much more carefully...

NBC -

Elon Musk courts Europe's surging far right
Musk has thrown his support behind far-right politicians in the U.K., Italy and Germany, where the leader of the AfD party has evoked Nazi rhetoric.

[Mo_reese]

It's interesting that those people that buy into the neo-liberal BS like to point out the gullibility of those buying into the MAGA BS. I was speaking to a person that supported Clinton, Biden and Harris and asked why they supported neo-liberalism and they asked me what neo-liberalism was.

[Gertie]

I was talking to an American friend at the time of the American election, who thinks anything Left of Kamala or Biden is self-indulgent wishful thinking. And that those refusing to vote for Kamala were effectively enabling Trump. And I completely get that, I'd probably have voted Dem too in her shoes.

She understands neo-liberalism, she's passionate about racism and sexism and the like, and calls herself a Liberal and Progressive - all of that is fine. But it struck me that Leftism, or class politics, isn't really a normal part of American poitics the way it still somewhat is here in the UK. Our modern politics grew out of trade unionism recognising it needed a voice in Parliament, that resulted in the founding of the Labour Party - representing the interests of Labour in a world run by aristocrats and the capital owning class. Left vs Right is embedded in the ideology of our two main parties. And the minor Liberal Democratic (third party) is more like the American Dems I'd say. Although that's changed over time as both parties roughly converged on neo-liberalism.

I don't know the history of the American political parties, but it seems different. And Leftism/Socialism is equated with Communism and Soviet style authoritarianism, which dare not say it's name. This might be a stereotype tho, I don't know.

What neither the Dems nor the 'New Labour' party seem to have grasped is that the old rules are out the window, which the Far Right is embracing. And that's because neo-liberalism has largely failed ordinary people's expectations, and primarily benefited the rich.

It's under neo-liberalism that Trump and the Far Right across Europe has blossomed, feeding on people's disaffection. They offer change, while centrist/status quo neo-liberalism offers more of the same.

The status quo is no longer the Safe Option, it's what got us here.

[Mo_reese]

In the US the Left is the middle. Nothing the Left wants is radical. The US is last in all categories that measure the health of the non-wealthy. For example, the US has more infants die before they reach one year in age (infant mortality) than any other modern nation. The same applies to maternal deaths. More homelessness and poverty. The only modern nation where people go bankrupt because of medial debt. More people incarcerated. The only difference between the Right Wing and the Neo-Liberal Democratic Elite is that the Democrats are willing to give token measures in the area of social justice to try to mollify the masses. With Trump's success we can see that the masses aren't mollified.

[Gertie]

Quite. I watched some of the Kamala election speeches and the democratic convention. All the ''joy'' stuff was so cringe, as was the playing almost entirely to identity politics. It was so tone deaf. The bump in the polls they got when Biden dropped out at jfc last, was yelling in their faces that people wanted change, and they threw it away.

What do you make of the Bernie/AOC tour? Do you think it has a chance of getting enough grass roots support to effect real change in the Dem party? Corbyn used a similar strategy, these things can catch the mood and shake things up.

[Sy Borg]

Capitalism is going strong and getting stronger. China and India have fully embraced capitalism, and they are a fair proportion of the world.

It's not capitalism that's collapsing, it's the west, which is being destroyed by globalism. The election of Trump is an example of a western nation trying to arrest the "managed decline" imposed on it by politicians of both stripes in the last thirty years. I'm interested to see if Trump's team (who are mostly former Democrats BTW and not the fascists claimed by liars), can pull the US out of what was looking like an inexorable death spiral that has been afflicting western nations.

Kamala would have been a mess. Her remarkably poor campaign made clear that she was in far over her head. Now the west can only hope Trump can help lift the US out of its slump. Let's see if it works. What governments beforehand were doing sure wasn't working - at least not for the voters.

[Mo_reese]

Quite. I watched some of the Kamala election speeches and the democratic convention. All the ''joy'' stuff was so cringe, as was the playing almost entirely to identity politics. It was so tone deaf. The bump in the polls they got when Biden dropped out at jfc last, was yelling in their faces that people wanted change, and they threw it away.

The trick of leaving Biden in until the last min was so transparent. They knew that Harris wouldn't stand up to a true campaign. Hubris. They clearly would rather lose to Trump than give an inch to the Left.

What do you make of the Bernie/AOC tour? Do you think it has a chance of getting enough grass roots support to effect real change in the Dem party? Corbyn used a similar strategy, these things can catch the mood and shake things up.

That's a great question and one that I've thus far refused to acknowledge. The short answer is “oh hell no”.That's about as apt to happen as Kamala Harris is to give an answer to a question without telling us how much she loves this country.
Too many progressives have been here before and will not let Lucy (DNC) pull out the football again.
The Dem Elite establishment chose to run Obama in 2008. Brilliant move, how could the progressive left resist a black candidate that promised to roll back the Patriot Act, close Gitmo and give us affordable healthcare? (that was rhetorical) And many on the Left fell for it. But Obama turned his back on the Left at his inauguration and never looked back.
It's not just the progressive Left that's bitter but the liberals that idolize the wealthy Dem neo-liberals are bitter that the Left didn't bow and scrape before their Democratic idols. I saw that a liberal posted “Harris in 2028”. They are not about to change. All they see is a non-white, female and wouldn't that be swell? The big money behind the Democratic elite isn't about to let the progressive Left have a thing.
I think the Left should ask that the DNC assure us right now that they will not run a candidate that doesn't pledge to stop supporting the Palestinian genocide. That won't happen.

[Sy Borg]

Not even Palestinians support Hamas, who are the true architects of the destruction of Palestine

Maybe they don't want to be martyrs for Hamas's perversion of Islam or for western Marxists? Maybe they prefer a government that, you know, governs rather than consistently leads the people into disastrous wars they cant win. Hamas treats Palestinians as cannon fodder because they want photos of death and devastation for the western media in their propaganda war.

Whatever, virtue signalling over Palestine (while ignoring Syria, Sudan and Congo) has no impact on capitalism which, as stated, is powering in the Asian economic powerhouses, and it may again start powering in the US, if Trump's plans work.

Capitalism in Europe is less certain. Certainly democracy in Europe is trouble, with a number of election results being overturned because voters apparently chose the wrong candidate [sic], as the region is ruled by the EU, an unelected body. The "poster boy" for possible death of European capitalism might be Klaus "You will own nothing and be happy" Schwab.

[Good_Egg]

I wonder how many Americans think that one of KH and DJT really is first-rate presidential material. And how many think - as many outside the US do - that there's something broken in a political system that throws up such poor candidates.

It's not about capitalism- it's about democracy.

[Mo_reese]

More eligible voters (80,000,000) in the US failed to vote for either of the two terrible choices than voted for either one. Neither party represents the people. Both are beholden to the wealthy Class.
Capitalism and democracy are inversely related. As the control of the capitalists grow, democratic control decreases. The capitalists have taken control of the US government and are violating the Constitution at every turn.