Seems like everything good would have been invented by people anyway, and lots of the bad things are done in the name of profits. Maybe they would have also happened in another system, but the point stands.
What, like, Double Stuffed Oreo's? Can we even call those good?
If you take a classical Marxist perspective, then the answer would be, yes. In as much as the profit motive underpins all activity within capitalist economies, it also underpinned the transformation of the world from feudal to contemporary society. Not every development during this time was produced by the profit motive (for example, most of the social gains came out of movements opposed to capitalism), but it definitely was the force that grew the productive capacities of European economies during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries (and also could be argued to have indirectly produced those social gains, in as much as capitalism creates its own gravediggers).
Of course, it also helped produce every atrocity that economic development involved. And you are also completely right to identify the fact that we have moved beyond the need for the profit motive. We have highly developed technical and productive capacities that could ensure that everyone has a good life, but to do so would mean rejecting the profit motive (i.e. capitalism) as the structuring principle of our economies.
I think you could argue that industrial-scale production wouldn't have happened without a profit motive. Not sure I'm gonna call that "good"
Not sure I’m gonna call that “good”
:a-guy:
I think it's been undeniably good. Look at modern medicine -- it's straight-up magic compared to what existed even one century ago. A lot of that is rooted in industrial-scale production (widespread availability of antibiotics, for instance).
The problems are:
- Who is benefiting from all of this amazing industrialized technology (under capitalism: the few), and
- Whether we can keep this amazing industrialized technology from destroying the planet (under capitalism: no).
A lot of that is rooted in industrial-scale production
I'm not opposed to technology or mass production, I was unclear and meant that we could have done the industrial revolution without the filthy slums, black smog belching smokestacks, and meat-grinder factory floors if the profit motive hadn't been the primary concern.
yeah, fair point. all the ideologies really do blur together if you zoom out far enough, tho. like, why did they build the giant pyramids and how is it different than this
As wasteful as capitalism can be, there's a difference between building an extravagant office/research park and building an extravagant mausoleum. I would rather we direct society's resources towards upgrading the means of production than towards erecting a mountain in a desert.
100% we would have gotten those earlier and better if those properties had been public domain the whole time. You know how many Robinhood/Sherlock movies there are?
We did, the Extended Universe only existed because Lucas wasn't as on the ball about prosecuting people as Disney. Also basically let other people do his job for free lol.
I crossed “wipe my ass with BB-8 and Captain America toilet paper” off my bucket list
thank mr capital
Chuds love capitalism and manhood and yet the star wars reboots which capitalism created destroyed manhood. Curious!
I can call Double Stuffed Oreos good but i can easily make them myself with two regular oreos so the point is moot.
I mean it gave us progress from feudalism and a next step towards socialism. But yeah capitalism and profit bad
Zootopia? Sure, but that shit? No profit motive, pure selfless art
Thanks. Backed out of that before I could get a look. Not interested in checking it again
Increasing labor productivity and consequent rise in standard of living is because of the profit motive. Decreasing labor costs through increasing productivity = more profit, at least until the competition catches up. Under communism, increasing labor productivity is pursued for its own sake, not indirectly through the search for profit(although its quite meaningless to talk about profit as money itself wouldnt be a thing)
Uhh. Yes. Lol
Almost every machine or algorithm which capitalists use in place of labor.
Is a mixed bag in when productivity gains are hoarded by capitalists. Is great if productivity gains are shared as they would be with socialism.
Imagine thinking times were better when 90 percent of the population were self sufficiency farmers
I mean, bourgeoise democracy and capitalism gave human society a lot in the way of technological development/productive power, but it also lead to the creation of the Proletarian class which of course was not a good thing. And also imperialism.
Well at first it was pretty bad for the newly minted proletariat. Being a factory worker or some other industrial worker was seen as being worse than being a peasant. Certainly the conditions were very very poor. Like, comically so. The poor in London used to have a pint of gin for dinner and pay 5 cents (or whatever brit currency I forget) to pass out folder over a stretch of rope (not hyperbole)
The power of the proletariat comes from their shared struggle and proximity to one another. Peasants had agreements with their lords and I would say that the current labor aristocracy/trade unions that formed from the early proles are equivalent to the peasant class of olde.
Right now the class that has the most revolutionary potential is the precariat/vagrant prole. People who have 20 jobs on their resume by the time they're 30. People who work gig economy jobs or service industry jobs, even homeless and lumpen workers. Trade unions are a useful starting point, but they have too much to lose to commit to revolutionary activity.
The creation of the Proletariat is why we even talk about communism at all, of course thats a good thing.
I've been buying yuppie perogies at the grocery. today, they had new varieties and more brands
since perogies (tied with dumplings) are the pinnacle of humanity, i believe that the profit motive incentivized companies to make more good yuppie food
