You’re missing the point completely my dude. There are no competative markets anymore. So there is no capitalism anymore. Do you understand?

Without a competative market, the system that’s extracting surplus value is NOT CAPITALISM.

Do you understand what the word “constituent” means?

It means, “a component that is part of a whole (noun) or something that’s necessary to form a part of a larger structure (adjective).”

Competative markets are constituent components to Capitalism. Thats what the wipedia page you linked says right after you stopped quoting it. So without competative markets there is no “whole” there is no capitalism.

If you sit down in a theater to watch a movie, and the projector doesn’t work, do you think you watched that movie? You bought a ticket for it. You sat down. But the constituent component of a projector broke, so all you saw was a black screen.

That is not a movie. Let alone watching one. But you would argue it is because you bought the ticket and sat down in the theater.

Capitalism’s competative markets are likewise broken, so what people are now experiencing is NOT capitalism.

This is not a hard concept to understand.

Wikipedia fully agrees with me if you read the very next paragraph from your link you didn’t quote, emphasis mine:

This socioeconomic system has developed historically in several stages, and is defined by a number of constituent elements: private property, profit motive, capital accumulation, competitive markets, commodification, wage labor, and an emphasis on innovation and economic growth.

Yes I understand markets are one component of capitalism, I also understand that without them we don’t have capitalism as like you’ve said that’s a constituent component necessary for it to be defined as capitalism.

What market is there for Facebook? Google? X? Your ISP? Your government? Is it like 2 companies you have a choice between at most? Between Verizon or Quest? Between Facebook or MySpace? Between Democrat or Republican?

If there’s extremely limited choices in your markets, you don’t have markets. So you don’t have capitalism.

If you don’t have markets where things can compete for money based on their innovation, you get enshittification from the few companies who control everything. Which is very obviously where we are now.

In short, the enshittification of all things is because we no longer have competitive markets for consumers to use their money to buy what’s best. In its place, instead we have a CRAPitalist system that clearly doesn’t fit the definition of capitalism.

Which is my point. Which is why you cherry picked your answer from Wikipedia rather than reading more than the first paragraph.

No, that’s what capitalism becomes when unregulated. Just as communism does the same when unregulated. The fact the US is on the literal same trajectory as Russia post USSR collapse is proof.

Open any Economics text book that defines what capitalism is, and by it’s literal definition, OP is correct. Capitalism, at its core, is about using capital + labor to make better products with better materials to compete in a market of others doing the same where consumers ultimately choose which company they buy from; in turn controlling which company thrives or dies. Competition is literally a key component of capitalism. It’s what most regulatory bodies were designed to protect (before they were captured). So without competition, we have something else that just looks like capitalism, but functions exactly like fascism.

I’m not defending capitalism by the way. I’m just pointing out what it is actually defined as versus what it has now become. I wouldn’t say Russia is Communist anymore by any means, so calling what the US and others practice now “Capitalism” is likewise mistaking what their system was in place of what it has become.

My dude, where do you think those LLM’s learned this style of formatting?

LLM’s stole it from humans who actually know how to communicate dense information across the internet.

OP is clearly one of those humans.

I COMPLETELY agree with you. Except in this one case it’s possible the problem is that the billionaires made an AI that understands how billionaires exploit financial systems and fear others could do the same with Mythos leading to actual legislation that would close the loop holes they spent decades creating within international finance legislation.

It doesn’t matter if they care, it matters what they do. Because that’s what decides the outcome in each scenario. Their actions. Not their feelings.

Trump ended up encouraging the genocide, planning to build a resort on top of mass graves. Kamala just didn’t verbally attack Israel openly.

Those actions are not the same, and would have lead to a different outcome despite both candidates not caring.

I did! Apologies about that! 🙌 Completely missed the thread I was supposed to be responding to.

One small improvement like this one, made every voting cycle, will eventually lead to wherever you want to move those goal posts.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo

Here’s President Clinton establishing the Oslo accords helping Gaza exist as a recognized nation in peace with Israel. Specifically,

Israel accepted the PLO as the representative of the Palestinians, and the PLO renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace. Both sides agreed that a Palestinian Authority (PA) would be established and assume governing responsibilities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip over a five-year period. Then, permanent status talks on the issues of borders, refugees, and Jerusalem would be held. While President Bill Clinton’s administration played a limited role in bringing the Oslo Accord into being, it would invest vast amounts of time and resources in order to help Israel and the Palestinians implement the agreement.

Just making sure you’re aware that voting helped establish Gaza’s existence.

And voting is also is the reason it could have been saved from genocide.

Trump was supposed to save Gaza according to large portions of people here on Lemmy that told me voting for Kamala would be voting for genocide in 2024.

Now we live in a world where the actual truth is much more obvious - that Kamala would have obviously protected Gaza more than Trump. (Simply because she’s not politically compromised by Israel the same way Trump is).

So now you want to tell me voting doesn’t work to prevent genocide. Despite the current outcome being very clearly AVOIDABLE through voting. Just that option wasn’t taken - largely through the encouragement of many here on Lemmy to not vote for Kamala.

If more people didn’t vote for Trump the genocide wouldn’t have happened. Period. That is just not the outcome we have now. That doesn’t mean voting failed. It means most people failed to vote for the person who could have stopped it.

Organize to do what outside of electorlism?

Asking because I’m genuinely curious what you feel is more affective than voting in how we can each contribute to avoiding genocide.

Within legal means of course. Because I’m certainly in support of deposing fascists and oligarchs.

Taking Orban as evidence, this can certainly be achieved through voting in even the most rigged of elections.

Well if you don’t vote, you just get all those things (and worse) happening anyway.

Unless you’re an oligarch of course. Then you can J6, Doge, destroy half the Whitehouse, etc.

The Logic I’m using is called:

Comparative Analysis Here’s a link on how it’s used. And how I used it to compare MAGA to China and why that works so well. .

Because, No, MAGA is not a meritocracy at all in any way. It’s laughably corrupt and run by idiots. Same as your government, though you just can’t actually say that without getting in trouble. That’s not “BEST” for you in any conceivable way. Just for China. which is my point.

I proved China banned this Winnie the Pooh movie from launching after you claimed China never did that at all. That it being banned at all was Western Propaganda.

Now you accept China did indeed ban it, then moved your goal posts from it not being banned at all, to being okay that it was banned for a while. Now the propaganda I’m believing is that it’s not available.

Cool. Can you tell me in a single sentence why it was banned to begin with? Now that you are actually admitting it was?

You can’t. I know this. Pretty sure you do too.

You literally do not have that freedom. Because that’s what’s "Best’ for China. So you won’t answer this.

Same reason you can’t and won’t say Liu Xiaobo’s full name.

The CIA does not run the Nobel committee. It’s an independent agency. Otherwise, Trump would have won the peace prize he wanted this year.

So Liu Xiaobo winning the Nobel Peace prize in 2010 had nothing to due with the CIA. The Nobel committee awarded it to him and said the following about his works that you’re not allowed to read or know exist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Xiaobo

… for his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China",[107] saying that Liu had long been front-runner as the recipient of the prize.[108] Liu’s wife, Liu Xia, expressed gratitude on behalf of her husband to the Nobel Committee, Liu’s proposers, and those who have been supporting him since 1989, including the Tiananmen Mothers—family members or representatives of those who were killed, or had disappeared, in the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre. She said, “The prize should belong to all who signed Charter 08 and were jailed due to their support”.[109]

Liu Xia informed her husband of his award during a visit to Jinzhou Prison on 9 October 2010, one day after the official announcement.[110] She reported that Liu wept and dedicated the award to those who suffered as a result of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989,[111] saying: “The award is first and foremost for the Tiananmen martyrs.”[112][113] After Mrs. Liu returned home, she was put under house arrest and was watched by armed guards.[111][112][113] She expressed the desire to attend the awards ceremony in Norway in December, but was skeptical of her chances of being allowed to do so.[114] Liu Xia wrote an open letter to 143 prominent figures, encouraging them to attend the award ceremony in Oslo.[115]

Liu was the second person to have been denied the right to have a representative collect the Nobel Prize for him as well as the second to die in custody, with the first being Ossietzky.[116] Berit Reiss-Andersen, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, blamed the Chinese communist regime for his death and said that “Liu Xiaobo had contributed to the fraternity of peoples through his non-violent resistance against the oppressive actions of the Communist regime in China.”[117]

Let me guess, somehow, I’m still believing some form of propaganda put in place by the woke leftist CIA? And MOST importantly - these idiots somehow magically invented the Tianeman square massacre as well.

This is a great moment to try and summarize my argument in a new way:

I’ll admit you’re right about everything if you can do all of the following in a single comment -

1. Type the full name “Liu Xiaobo”
2. Explain in a single sentence why that Winnie the Pooh movie was banned in 2017.
3. Type in the words “Tiananmen Square 1989” in that order.

You literally aren’t allowed to do these things. So you won’t.

You’ll instead write up a page of excuses as to why this is. And it will all be obvious propaganda the same as it is with MAGA. Because that’s what’s “BEST” for China: you repeating lies that protect them because otherwise you’ll realize you have no power to do anything other than that.

FYI, I’ll happily link you to pictures of the corpses left behind at Tianamen Square to prove it happened. It includes pictures of the student protestors there holding pro-democracy signs and usually makes whoever I’m talking to in China never respond again.

The neat trick about knowing about the prison you’re in better than you, is that I can just use it against you.

China just calls that prison Democracy. And you believe them because you have no choice otherwise.

By ALL means, let me know if you’d like me to prove my point more clearly.

Logic doesn’t need non-NES sources.

You might as well be complaining my sources weren’t MAGA enough for you. Logic is immutable, that’s why my entire argument is constructed through comparison to MAGA.

You can’t say MAGA is bad without agreeing China is bad for the same reasons. You also can’t say China is good without agreeing MAGA is good for the same reasons.

That makes my comparison impossible to attack as untrue and why you are running from it as needing sources. I don’t need sources to see a square peg fits a square hole. I can just point out both are square shaped, which I have.

Same with “repeating things that have been disproven by basically by every Chinese person.”

That’s an assumption you’re making. You might as well be saying “repeating things that have been disproven by basically every MAGA.”

They have disproven nothing. They just say they have. Same as you. You are confusing opinions as facts, as long as they come from a Chinese source. Same as MAGA confusing Trumps opinions for facts if they come from a MAGA source.

Here’s China banning a Winnie the Pooh movie from releasing there:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/07/china-bans-winnie-the-pooh-film-to-stop-comparisons-to-president-xi

Who’s afraid of Winnie the Pooh? The Chinese government, apparently. Chinese censors have banned the release of Christopher Robin, a new film adaptation of AA Milne’s beloved story about Winnie the Pooh,

Here’s an explanation for why they banned it that will likely get you arrested for reading:

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855

The blocking of Winnie the Pooh might seem like a bizarre move by the Chinese authorities but it is part of a struggle to restrict clever bloggers from getting around their country’s censorship.

It is not only that China’s censors will not tolerate ridicule of the country’s leader, they do not want this beloved children’s character becoming a kind of online euphemism for the Communist Party’s general secretary.

Bloggers started to refer to being censored as having been “harmonised” - bei hexie le 被和谐了 - but, by changing the tones in Chinese or changing the characters, you can fudge the meaning. So another hexie is river crab 河蟹。In other words, when you see an image of a river crab on the internet in China, it is likely to be a reference to something having been censored.

Another Chinese leader Jiang Zemin came up with a political theory called Three Represents, san ge daibiao 三个代表。If you switch that around a bit it becomes dai san ge biao 带三个表, or wear three watches. So the wearing of three watches became a cheeky way of referring to his contribution to China’s socialism “with Chinese characteristics”.

It is not necessarily easy to get around China’s censors though. For example they have been extremely successful at virtually wiping out the existence of the country’s number one dissident Liu Xiaobo - the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize who died in custody here last week - at least as far as the general public goes.

Most Chinese citizens have simply never heard of him.

On that note, by all means research the above on your own internet from non-NES sources, and see what you find. I’m sure your results will be completley unbiased as only the “BEST” results have been pre-chosen as available for you to read.

Go look up Liu Xiaobo and then explain how your result is the “BEST” at describing his work and who he is.

This is literally a distillation of the wikipedia about the chinese government.

It is not.

Your Chinese Government tells you who is best, and you believe them.

That does not mean, in anyway, those people are indeed the best at what they do.

You blindly trust your government to make that determination for you.

Let me make your governments undemocratic nature completely obvious to you by simply not talking about China for a bit.

Would you consider America GREAT right now? According to it’s current President, it’s the greatest it’s ever been. The head of the FBI? The greatest. Our FDA? The greatest. Our Education department? The greatest.

Just like China, Trump now decides who is the “BEST” for us. So on paper, according to him and our Whitehouse website, we’re now the BEST there is, run by great people with a great president to Make America Great Again (MAGA) TM.

Except all that is bullshit. You know it. I know it. They’re just SAYING they’re great. Using the media they own to repeat that lie until everyone who hears it believes them.

So now a large portion of our population is MAGA, and fully believe a convicted ex-con reality TV pedofile is a “GREAT” president. A washed up podcaster is a “GREAT” head of our FBI, an insane heroine addict with brain worms is a “GREAT” doctor, and the wife of a scandalous wrestling federation owner makes for a “GREAT” teacher.

None of that is actually GREAT. They’re all just about the furthest you could get from what “great” is.

All these morons just have enough popularity to lie about being GREAT. And nearly 40% of this country is stupid enough to believe them.

The same is true with how you feel about your “Chinese Democracy” being filled with the “BEST” people.

It’s not. It’s just filled with whoever your government wants to call “BEST.” And you, just like MAGA, blindly trust their opinion. As that’s the way you were raised.

In reality, your government is entirely built around what’s best for THEM. Not YOU. So it’s filled with similar idiots.

That’s why it’s BEST for Chinese Democracy if YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT:

• Whinnie the Pooh.
• Taiwan.
• Tianneman Square.
• Uigher Muslims.
• Or people like Joshua Wong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Wong

Someone who protested your government for Democracy in Hong Kong and was jailed for 5 years for it. Jailed because what was BEST for “Chinese Democracy” was suppressing any conversation about real Democracy. That’s why he was punished, and why you can no longer discuss it without threat of the same. Something your government has been doing for it’s entire existence.

All because what’s BEST for Chinese Democracy, is YOU NOT discussing or thinking about what’s best for YOU.

So unless YOU have an actual say in what’s BEST for YOU, you do not have a democracy. You have something pretending to be one, while also pretending to know what’s BEST for you.

Same as our current US government. Pretending to be Democratic and GREAT, while it’s actually all about just doing whatever Orange man feels like that day. Invading Iran, capturing the President of Venezuala, all of that was GREAT according to our government, the same way yours tells you what’s BEST.

The difference is this US government is obviously bullshit to anyone born before it. Yet clearly the same isn’t true for you. If you were born before 1989 you would have seen your current government target, expel, and assassinate it’s best doctors, teachers and generally the “BEST” people they had if they happen to be pro-democracy.

Tianneman Square is banned from discussion in your country because it’s proof your government actively killed pro-democratic protestors including students. Running them over with military vehicles, burning their remains, and then washing them down street drains.

All to make way for “Chinese Democracy” TM. The Chinese version of MAGA. Which is what you live in now.

The reason you’re not allowed to know about Tianneman Square is that it proves your current government is not at all Democratic and actively killed people who supported real democracy. You not knowing this is what they consider “BEST” for you. Because then you might realize you don’t live in a democracy.

At least I’m free enough to admit that in my own country. Specifically, America is no longer a Democracy.

You’d be jailed if you tried to say the same. Because that’s what’s BEST for those who run China. They fear you knowing this and trying to change their government into something better for YOU, so they make it illegal for you to express any other opinion than the one you’re currently arguing.

It’s literally illegal for you to express any form of agreement with what I’ve said. And you really think that’s democracy? Democracy isn’t being trained to think China #1 > You #1. That’s just brainwashing. Same as MAGA.

Me: Maybe people who have the most experience and expertise should be able to discuss those opinions openly so as to reach consensus as to what the “BEST” outcome could be for literally anything imaginable.

You: Mao Daddy #1. Better than all “experts” who hurt his feelings. (Including Pooh Bear)

Bro. Stop hurting yourself in your confusion. I was never comparing western democracy to anything other than it’s absense from this world. Something you are clearly rooting for without understanding what that obviously implies about your own “democracy.” You’re just controlled by Mao daddy, same as MAGA is controlled by Trump. Constant exposure to a false reality that you can’t tell is fake due to your own limited freedom.

Your allegiances should be to yourself, not someone exploiting your insecurities and daddy issues. Fuck all countries, and work to better yourself so you can be a voice that others listen to about what’s BEST. That’s what all authoritarian fucks fear most, so stop thinking they’re anything more than just bunch of bullshit they made you afraid of.

ThErE’s No QuEsTiOn oN wHo ThE BeSt PluMbEr is… "

Yes there absolutely is and always will be a question on who the best fucking plumber is.

“BEST” isn’t some kind of universally defined state of being. What’s “BEST” is completely fucking subjective and SHOULD be determined by a network of experts or peers, as that’s likely how your are determining what’s BEST for you.

As THAT IS HOW EVERYONE DEFINES WHAT IS “BEST.”

Whose the best plumber in your area?

Did you check Google? And find someone with 500 reviews that are all 5 stars?

How about Yelp?

How about the Better Business Bureau?

Wow. Every single resource available that can determine who the “BEST” plumber is comes from a collection of unique inputs from others that have a shared experience of using that plumber. All whose collected perspectives on Google reviews let a sentient jar of mayonnaise like yourself determine who the BEST plumber is.

Whats BEST is completely subjective at best, and not easily determined by anyone but a panel of experts which you clearly use without noticing on a near daily basis.

At worst, BEST is an ever changing non-existing state that can never be determined without other fixed inputs.

Whose the BEST basketball player?

Is it Michael Jordan or LeBron James?

ARE BOTH THE “BEST” DEPENDING ON HOW THAT QUESTION IS ASKED?

Oh shit, looks like you need additional input to determine what the BEST even is in literally every single interpretation of it imaginable.

Maybe you should hire a panel of experts to figure out who THE BEST IS at that moment. Or maybe a massively broad review of everyone’s opinion to determine from the masses who the BEST IS TO THEM.

OH SHIT THAT’S DEMOCRACY AND THE OBVIOUS FUCKING BENEFITS THAT ADDED EXPERTISE AND PERSPECTIVE PROVIDES.

What is BEST isn’t simple to determine at all. Your entire argument is garbage. And based on a laughably dumb and short sighted perspective that doesn’t hold up to the most basic scrutiny.

Great question. Putin is like Trump. He acts like he’s under constant threat. So if an attempt on his life fails, it just becomes another propaganda point about Russians being under threat of the West. Something that most of them are now completely sick of hearing. So it would be a piece of news immediately doubted as real, as it’s distributed through the same propaganda channels as his actual propaganda.

Worst thing: Putin would retaliate. But he currently has no army or soldiers to do so. So he’d threaten nukes as he already has, and immediately be ignored as he always is.

If the US tried to kill Putin, and failed, he’d cry wolf to an uncaring world that’s heard him say the same for decades. His complaints will fall on deaf ears until the next attempt is successful.

Completely agree about the nukes. And I think that’s a good point to bring up.

Imo, and this is completely just my own perspective: We’re currently already on a course for nukes likely being used again. If not by Russia, then by the US or Israel in relation to the war in Iran.

So when it comes to an active nuclear threat, I feel we’re already there. And since we are, it then becomes better to eliminate anyone willing to use nukes than it is to wait until they’re all old enough to not care if they do.

Imo, Putin becomes far more of a nuclear threat as he ages. The next best time to eliminate that threat was yesterday. Otherwise we may not get a chance at all, as he’ll just use them anyway.

Not after losing half a million citizens and untold amounts of Military equipment in the Ukraine. Russia is now literally weaker than they’ve ever been, and Trump has spent that whole decline sucking Putins Dick behind closed Doors instead of cutting it off.

Putin’s only powerful because you fall for that narrative. He’s a weak man, with weak ideas, in a weak body, riddled with pancreatic cancer.

Killing him now would be easier than ever, and every leader in the world is a big ass pussy about it because they believe social media over reality. When social media has been almost completely controlled by Russian intelligence for the last decade.

Putins a weak bitch that could be snuffed out in a moment the same as the Ayatolla. The only reason you think he’s untouchable is because you believe the propaganda he’s been putting out instead of the cold facts:

His economy is weak. His Military is weak. He is weak.

Letting him live out of the fear he’s a bigger monster than that is how he’s stayed alive this long. And it’s amazing to me our world leaders are such big pussies to fall for it. Which explains why Trump has so easily grabbed them all.