this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
325 points (94.8% liked)

Socialism

5095 readers
57 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OpenStars@startrek.website 15 points 5 months ago (49 children)
[–] rah@feddit.uk -1 points 5 months ago (48 children)

No, it isn't. "Capitalism" doesn't depend on growth. You can have a shrinking economy, even an intentional degrowth economy, which is still capitalist.

Whatever thing it is you're referring to that assumes infinite growth, that thing isn't capitalism.

[–] OpenStars@startrek.website 1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

While technically true in theory, I was pointing out how in practice people tend to implement it differently. It doesn't help that almost every irl system that people describe as "capitalist" is not pure - e.g. the UK (& the USA in the era of 50s-60s) are a mixture of socialist policies & capitalist ones, like there can be "public" (socialism) schools funded by taxpayer dollars and controlled by the government side-by-side along with "private" (capitalist) schools that aim to provide a different experience (usually higher-end but oftentimes something else like a more religious affiliation). So the "pure capitalism" theoretical model does not seem to have much irl practical application, without adding all of those extra features that while not mandatory in the theory, seem to almost always be used in practice.

[–] QueerCommie@hexbear.net 3 points 5 months ago

That’s just capitalism. It’s absurd to define capitalism as only capitalism absent government intervention when the government has always existed on their behalf (as long as the system’s been in place).

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (46 replies)
load more comments (46 replies)