Is it when you use capital letters properly?

    • plyth@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Workers can prefer to live in a capitalist society if they end up with owning more, or just hope so. So they can be capitalist despite not owning capital. Of course that ignores the distinction between the role as capitalist and the believe.

      In general, people don’t value being in control. If they would, people would have moved to Lemmy.

      There is still the opportunity that those who care actively push Lemmy beyond its natural growth to make it competitive with Reddit. But at what cost? Then people would choose Lemmy, but not by conviction.

      Similarly, people could stop being capitalists by being able to work in a country with a better offer. But that wouldn’t make them anti-capitalist.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        20 hours ago

        You’re confusing capitalists, ie capital owners, with liberals, those who are pro-capitalism. As for Lemmy, its growth is tied to recognition and Reddit’s decay, the established community on Reddit is itself the draw.

        • plyth@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          19 hours ago

          I would say only a subset of liberals accept raw Capitalism. Liberals need free markets which is a contradiction with Capitalism.

          To have less capitalistic structures, people would have to support something with no immedite benefits. Just waiting for Capitalism’s decline is like waiting for Reddit’s decline. It’s always there but never so much that the majority switches. Something is missing that people act on their own.

          • eldavi@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            liberalism is defined by its adherence to capitalism; if you’re not a capitalist, then you’re also not a liberal.

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Liberalism requires individual freedom, including free markets. Capitalism ends with monopolies that destroy free markets.

              It is not the same. Liberal societies must want regulated markets.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            19 hours ago

            Liberalism is the ideological aspect of capitalism. “Raw capitalism” doesn’r really mean anything.

            To move onto socialism, we need to overthrow the state, replace it with a socialist one, and establish public ownership as the principle aspect of the economy. Countries like China, Vietnam, and Cuba have already done this, as did the former USSR.

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              For liberalism, see sibling comment.

              we need to overthrow the state

              Capitalism is making sure that there is not much of a we.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                14 hours ago

                Capitalism with monopoly is still capitalism, Liberalism being a failed ideology does not mean it ceases to be Liberalism as it fails. There’s absolutely a we within capitalism, the working classes are a we.

                • plyth@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  How would socialism prevent power from accumulating? Liberals could probably do the same with capital.

                  There should be a working class we in capitalism but I don’t see it. Why do you think that it exists and that it is not dispersed?

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    What do you mean “power accumulating?” This sounds like you’re talking about magic or something. Capitalists use capital for their plunder, I don’t see what you mean by linking that to socialism. As for the working class “we,” are you asking why we aren’t organized? That takes time and effort.