Replies (28)
Dad guided by his children tells you everything you need to know. 🤦♂️

😂
This sexual perversion was a marxist phenomenon as Russia turned communist.

Quote from ‘Live not by Lies’ by Rod Dreher
Exactly. People usually don't know what they are talking about when it's about communism.
America has been brainwashed to think communism is the USSR or China. Because you need an absolute enemy for capitalist leaders (not you, those with billions).
Anarcho communism is a thing and has actually been crushed by the USSR.
I agree.
At the same time, I need to participate in this world. So I put ephemeral words on the current state of my political vision of the word. Feel free to challenge it.
Really? Like what?
You can assume whatever you want.
Humor is very relative across people and cultures, and it is often very confusing on nostr.
Would you mind telling me what is the nonsense you reject?
By the way I updated my bio so I hope it is a little more clear.
Should be the other way around.
It can go both ways.
Maybe when they’re adults.
Men chosing to wear blinders...
This is sad.
Just so I know, are you a father? Or do you speak from what you imagine?
Either way, are you familiar with montessori pedagogy or unschooling?
Children have many things to teach us. Even some great ancient man living in Palestine recognised it.
Just so I know, are you trying to shill me a contrarian science for some very basic common sense? If so, I’m not interested. But I’m happy for you.
Why would I want to challenge your perspective. I accept yours as a unique contribution to all the potential perspectives that exist. I know from my own experience that ones own perspectives change over time as we integrate new in-formation.
I do believe that we can not overcome ideas like capitalism or communism. They are "just" words to express something that is energetically present.
Polarities exist to level up our experience. Integrating those aspects is what a spiritual path in matter is all about.
So if you are familiar with the concept of spiral dynamics or the work of Ken Silver you already know that certain expressions on individual and collective levels are just there, will have their function and correspond with the capabilities of ones orva groups consciousness.
Pain mostly comes from trying to eradicate things like capitalism or communism for its downsides ignoring its upsides.
One ring to rule them all, will always and inevitably fall as it is unable to balance its own downside forces without a corrective force.
The question therefore becomes, which kind of capitalism AND communism AND much more on other dimensions do I want to represent.
Bitcoiners for example are discussing a lot about citadels. But what else are they as small scale communitarian projects that need to find ways to coordinate without capitalistic reign as the ordering principle?
So there is a lot linked to the loaded meaning of words or an associated topic that is connected to traumatic memories and for that pulls a reaction in us. Take care of that. Work through your fears and integrate the aspects that are meant to becseen and lived in this world.
Much more to say about this. But for one I leave it at that.
I am not. You tackle my bio, I answer. If you are not interested in debating and sharing information, what are you doing here?
Thank you for that.
Challenges, especially of perspective, are what make them evolve. I am building mine thanks to confrontations of ideas and perspectives I have come across. So it's really an invitation to anyone who want to have sincere and honest talk about it.
I did not now about spiral dynamics or the work of Ken Silver but I will check this and it resonates for me.
"The question therefore becomes, which kind of capitalism AND communism AND much more on other dimensions do I want to represent."
I love this sentence.
Words do indeed carry a lot of weight, I agree I should take care of that, knowing that I need them to communicate with others and call a cat a cat. But this is the main issue. What are we even exactly talking about when we use words such as capitalism or communism? We all have our own biased perception. This takes work, patience and commitment to define and refine the right words to communicate with others and pass this biases. This work I am willing to do.
*Ken Wilber
Not sure why you bring that up, but it seems to apply well to capitalist billionaires of today too.
I totally agree.
What I am looking for is indeed a free society, and the question of what would be the necessary foundations for it. So I have looked into many systems and anarcho communism seems to be the closest thing to a free society I have found.
What brought me there is the often missing question of how to prevent a few people to take power over others. If this question does not have a solid answer, we can open spaces for freedom only until it is overtaken.
Anarcho capitalism fails to answer this (how to prevent monopoly in a free market).
If some people fall under the power of others, my freedom is threatened by this growing power.
In order to be lastingly free, I need everyone to be free too.
The quote describes marxists and the consequences after they implement their 'unconstrained view'. This view does not see man as flawed and that the ideal society is rules by the proletariat (aka the Anointed).
Epstein Island visitors were a mix politicians, royals, scientists, executives and some billionaires. They are all part of the current intellectual class that is insulated, self-congratulatory & beliefs it has superior insight to reshape society without suffering personal consequences. They have a 'unconstrained worldview' and see themselves as part of the Anointed elite.
The billionaires that visited Epstein island are not free-capitalist, but rather crony capitalists, which can best be described as anti-capitalist. The reason it is anti-capitalist is that the only way for them to establish and maintain a monopoly is in their ability to keep competition out. And being part of the ruling intellectual class gives them access to government power, which can create regulation or laws to keep out competition.
In the US the slide away from free-market capitalism has been 100+ years in the making, which I won't go into.
As a marxist I suggest you read 'Marxism: Philosophy and Economics' by Thomas Sowell. Thomas Sowell is African American economist that was a marxist until the age of 30 when he worked at the Department of Labor. This book was written during that time.
Thank you for the precision and reference. Thomas Sowell's work seems very interesting.
I would not define myself as a marxist. As spotted in the post, anarchist comes first. I believe putting certain things in the commons is necessary to guarantee freedom, but also in free market. I reject statism and favor a convivialist-local scale.
My main pain point with capitalism is about how to prevent monopolies and capital concentration to occur. I have come to think that free market is not enough and capitalism logically ends up forming a crony elit of oligarchs.
Regarding sexual unconstrained behaviour and looking at history, it seems to me that it is more a general trend for elites than a marxist thing, only getting worse at the end of an era.
My current short answer would be: by establishing themselves as the state.
It is still a work of understanding in progress, but as I see it, modern states are byproducts of capitalism, not opposing structures.
The following note dives into it.
I would add an historical perspective that modern states and democracies were established by what I would call a oligopoly of bourgeois employers accessing power thanks to the industrial revolution and creating a settlement institution for themselves. In the name of the people, but with an entry price (cens).
Please let me know what you think of it.
BlueDuckBTC
The problem with this argument is that it relies on a No True Scotsman fallacy. Every time capitalism’s outcomes are criticized, the response is that we do not live under true capitalism. The system that actually exists is always treated as an aberration rather than the logical result of capitalist incentives operating over time.
The bureaucratic monopolistic society you describe is not a corruption external to capitalism. It is capitalism doing exactly what it is structurally incentivized to do. Capitalism’s defining objective is not serving people. It is profit maximization. Selling something for more than it costs to produce. That incentive does not stop at the market boundary. Firms rationally seek to reduce competition, shape rules in their favor, raise barriers to entry, and externalize costs such as healthcare, labor, education and environmental damage.
When capital accumulates, the most efficient way to protect profit is no longer innovation. It is political influence.This is not socialism. It is regulatory capture, a phenomenon extensively documented in mainstream economics. Industries systematically capture regulators to serve profit and shareholder interests rather than the public. Public Choice Theory explains how private actors use the state to entrench economic advantage. Peer reviewed research has repeatedly linked market concentration to lobbying power and weakened competition and demonstrates that capital concentration naturally converts into political power unless it is actively countered.
The regulations you are pointing to are not anti capitalist constraints imposed from outside the system. They are capitalist behaviors expressed through the state. Capital does not invade government accidentally. It does so because it is profitable.
This is why food insecurity and healthcare failures exist inside wealthy capitalist nations. Healthcare markets optimize for revenue rather than outcomes as documented by the World Health Organization and the Commonwealth Fund. Food systems prioritize shareholder value resulting in both massive waste and widespread hunger. Market choice disappears when industries consolidate, something the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice openly acknowledge has accelerated.
Saying real capitalism would wipe out big business ignores history. Unregulated capitalism has never remained competitive for long. It tends toward monopoly because scale, capital accumulation, and political leverage are competitive advantages. If capitalism were self correcting, it would not require perpetual bailouts, repeated antitrust interventions, or constant state support to prevent collapse. The fact that it does is evidence that the outcomes being criticized are not a deviation from capitalism but its mature form. Capitalism concentrated wealth beyond our imaginations. We live in a post scarcity environment where victims of capitalism and socio economic factors alike keep hundreds of millions unhoused, hungry and sick while the capitalist owners, that by nature produce nothing (proof of work) and only extract value through rent seeking behaviors, enjoy socialist benefits provided by and extracted from the workers that produce all of the things of value that we use. It’s become very common for the capitalist to rage against socialism while they enjoy all of our socialist benefits and initiatives while insisting that the rest of society must stick to raw unfettered capitalism. It’s also very common now for uneducated and ill informed workers to defend capitalism and vote against their own self interest as well. Capitalism only favors those who have breached a certain threshold of accumulation which is only achieved and made possible through extortion of the worker.
View quoted note →
“Direct Democracy” would solve all the mentioned issues.
Why do you think that system is not “allowed” worldwide? (see Switzerland) 🤔
Instead the “indirect democracy” is preferred, where people handover whole power to so called “representatives” invariably present on all sides: left, centre and right. That power is knowingly given to them for few years, with no easy way to reclaim it if things go bad.
In a “Direct Democracy” the State has exactly the amount of power people decide should have at ANY given time. NOTHING can be done without people’s consent ‼️
What you describe are Worker Cooperatives and democratic socialism.
And Mondragon Corporation.
I think the spread and education of worker cooperatives would be a big plus in bringing about change.
Research Mondragon Corporation, they have and continue to work out many problems with large worker cooperatives. But, there are also a lot more worker cooperatives operating out there. My power is under a cooperative. It’s pretty much a proven concept that capitalist want to keep quiet.