• YeetPics@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      No, you stupid western swine. That’s just westoid propaganda!

      However I, too, wasn’t aware China’s historic fascism problem was the result of capitalistic woes.

      Everyday i learn new facts from .ml, like China invented capitalism (take THAT, Sumer!!1).

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    From the peanut gallery, aka me… Most business are run under a more fascist principle.

    I’m not talking about how the business operates in the market, or whatever… I’m talking about internal organizational behaviour.

    Things are often very “my way or the highway”, with management, owners, etc.

    Of course, not all businesses, but most follow some fairly fascist ideologies. They’ll tell you where to be, what to bring, what to do, when to stop… And hey, where are your papers? … I mean… Where is your company issued identification card?

    They’ll watch what you’re doing, monitor and surveil you as much as they are legally allowed, govern every moment that they can, of every day you’re working there.

    Capitalism and the pursuit of profit is their objective, the governance is fascist.

    Business leaders engage in fascism.

    … Why are we surprised that this brain rot is leaking out into actual politics? Trump is literally known for running businesses… Mostly into the ground/bankruptcy, but still. His whole thing is him being the boss. The ruler and Lord dictator over his tiny island. How are we so surprised that he’s a fascist? Shocked picachu

    The best move the Nazis made was convincing everyone that yeah, the Nazis lost and are gone forever… They’re literally hiding in plain sight.

    • Eylrid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Businesses use feudalism, with the monarch (CEO), court (board), and several levels of lords and vassals.

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Wasn’t fascism modelled after early feudalism?

        There were obvious differences, fascism has more nationalism and racism, IMO, but at the core, aren’t they extremely similar?

        I’m no expert on either. I just know enough to get myself into (and hopefully out of) trouble in these discussions.

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Fascism is a reactionary attempt to “turn back the clock” to the glory days of Capitalism before it decayed as much. Capitalism necessarily results in crisis, at which points occasionally the Bourgeoisie and Petite Bourgeoisie, the “middle class,” work together against the lower classes, ie the Proletariat and Lumpenproletariat. It usually rises as a response to climbing Socialism as the train of thought among the Proletariat.

          It isn’t necessarily modeled after anything, history isn’t driven by ideas but Material Conditions and class conflict.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      That’s not what fascism is. Fascism isn’t “when there are shitty strict rules”. In fact, classical fascism is a (failed) class collaborationist ideology where the state was supposed to mediate between interest groups of workers and bosses. protip: it didn’t. workers got screwed. (see corporatism, from the root word corpus, not corporation). Nazism didn’t do any of that but even they had their own garbage state-run labor front.

      But the point being, those business are beyond even fascism. It’s straight-up pure raw capitalist dictatorship.

    • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It should be of little surprise (and much more widespread knowledge) that just about everyone with money in the 1930s financially supported the actual Nazi party, including but not limited to Henry Ford and George W Bush’s grandfather.

      I actually disagree with the meme; capitalism is always fascism, just sometimes has a better PR team.

      • Eylrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        sometimes with a better PR team

        Which is a big thing in The Boys. The company and The Seven™ are all about that PR.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes, sadly. During the dissolution of the USSR, millions of people died, literacy rates plumetted, safety nets were plundered by opportunistic Capitalists, and the State was sliced up and sold for parts. This privitization was a disaster for the common worker.

        • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Technically, they are just now approaching the metrics they had in the USSR, so they are getting there! Just slowly and unequally.

          • immutable@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I’ve been so sad to see the privatization of NASA. It feels very similar to me. Spaced celebrating about launching a rocket into low earth orbit after spending billions in taxpayer money. How is this progress? We could do it back in the 60s with the equivalent computing power you can find in a $7 wristwatch today. Why didn’t we just keep building on our success, no we had to privatize, so that we could reach a beautiful end goal where space would not be for science and exploration funded by the people with its fruits improving humanity.

            No we all had to pull together so spacex can build a massive taxpayer funded toll booth and every time America would like to visit the stars some billionaires can collect their cut. And people cheer

            • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Now go check out how much each launch of the shuttle cost ($1.5 billion per flight) and compare it to the costs by SpaceX. The shuttle was launched 135 times, SpaceX has had more launches than that in the last 3 years. That tiny computer got us to the moon, but it wasn’t enough to make rockets or boosters be able to land or be reusable. And don’t bring up the farce of reusability of the shuttle. The number I recall from back when it was still flying was a 75% overhaul to get it flight ready.

              Elon may be an enormous asshole, but SpaceX has taken what they got from NASA and moved it to the point where they’re one of a handful of groups who could get us back to the moon, and doing better than any corporation on that front (China may surpass them, and Artemis only counts as a long-term concern if they can do more than 5 or 6 launches ever, which is not the current plan).

              • daltotron@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                I mean arguably we could’ve done all of that with nasa if nasa had received a similar level of funding to SpaceX, but that’s kind of getting into alt-history.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes, which is why it is important to protect communist projects from capitalist backed coups, like the presidential coup that illegally and undemocratically dissolved the USSR

      • RidderSport@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Quite funny of you to mention undemocratic in the context of the USSR, as if it had been a democracy even one day of its existence. And about illegal, most of the times a country and its constitution is absolved its technically illegal. I can only think of the German constitution that actually has clauses on how to legally phase it out.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          as if it had been a democracy even one day of its existence

          It was literally a democracy for its entire existence. Now, during the last couple decades it wasn’t as democratic as proletarian democracies like Cuba Vietnam and China, but it was still more democratic than bourgeois “democracies”

          And about illegal, most of the times a country and its constitution is absolved its technically illegal.

          Okay but was it good that the Russian president ordered tanks to bombard the Soviet parliament building until the parliament surrendered? Is that your take? Even when it led to the installation of “bourgeois” democracies and a humanitarian crisis not seen outside of war?

          Just now the nations which made up the USSR are meeting old life expectancy metrics. And that is uneven, some of them still haven’t, some of them are doing better.

          Also LOL you are German, you’d know a thing about reducing Soviet life expectancy. Your nation killed more than 25 million Soviet citizens, 1/6 of the total population. Maybe you have an imperative to do some research on what Soviet democracy was from their perspective instead of regurgitating anticommunist shit out your mouth like a good little anti-communist German.

          • RidderSport@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Ah right so we go ad-hominum now? Frankly pretty low of you. Also it just sounds like a way to say that I am not allowed to have any differing opinion, simply because of my country’s past. Makes me want to find out where you’re from and tell you you’re not eligible to say anything because your country fucked up badly in the past.

            You expect me to believe that USSR votes weren’t rigged from the get-go? Next you tell me the GDR was an actual democracy. To be fair I actually didn’t know that there were elections, which in hindsight should be obvious considering that they had a parliament. They still had dictators of much the time

            As for the violence part, not that I am supporting that, but frankly it seems to be pretty much part of the Russian identity. It’s not like the USSR was not to take a friendly approach to any kind of civil unrest at all.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Ah right so we go ad-hominum now? Frankly pretty low of you. Also it just sounds like a way to say that I am not allowed to have any differing opinion, simply because of my country’s past. Makes me want to find out where you’re from and tell you you’re not eligible to say anything because your country fucked up badly in the past.

              No, you are not personally responsible for your country being incredibly anticommunist. I know what my country has done in the past, it has happened to some of my ancestors and living family. Which is why I am skeptical of the things my country tells me about its opponents, as I am encouraging you to be by emphasizing to you what is in the political atmosphere you find yourself breathing.

              You expect me to believe that USSR votes weren’t rigged from the get-go?

              Do you have any evidence that they were?

              Next you tell me the GDR was an actual democracy.

              If was. And women and LGBT people lost a lot of rights during reunification. Not to mention the plundering of nationalized industry by the capitalist class, greatly decreasing the wealth of the rest of the country.

              I would suggest reading “why women had better sex under socialism, and other arguments for economic independence”

              To be fair I actually didn’t know that there were elections

              It takes a lot to admit this. I would suggest taking this as a moment to reflect on what you actually know vs what you think you know.

              They still had dictators of much the time

              Uh, no? Even during the height of WW2 Stalin still answered to a committee.

              As for the violence part, not that I am supporting that, but frankly it seems to be pretty much part of the Russian identity. It’s not like the USSR was not to take a friendly approach to any kind of civil unrest at all.

              Frankly this is kinda racist and beneath you from the moments of reflection I’ve seen in this interaction.

              • RidderSport@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Look I’d actually support socialism or at least strong social-capitalism. Just wanna make that clear.

                Arguing certain things worked way better during the GDR does not at all refute my point of it not being a democracy apart from on paper. Child care for one worked incomparably better than it now does. Privatisation and more importantly the dissolvement of companies did not go well and is certainly still a problem. Actually it caused neo-feudalism in parts of the former GDR.

                Stalin being officially reproachable does not actually mean he was reproachable. The kind of socialism the USSR practiced is in my opinion not all better than a well restricted capitalism. But to be fair, that is subjective and I am financially not in any kind of trouble.

                It was not meant to be racist, the history of violence in Russia since I am vaguely aware of its history, does speak of itself. Certainly in the years since the founding of the RF, has violence among the people and state-sanctioned been a common thing. The wide-spread unrestricted violence can be openly observed in Ukraine. If you look at any macro-violense theories you see my point proven. All and I mean all factors for mass-violence are fulfilled.

                Also if anything, my comment was xenophobic, racism is something different

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Hey, it looks like your heart is in the right place, I would really suggest you read a bit about participatory democracy and whole process people’s democracy (although the latter has a lot of misinfo about it) I would also try to understand the socialist argument from one party democracies and how they lead to more generative conflict (that is, collegeal onflict that genuinely resolves problems and addresses needs in a way that achieves democratic consensus)

                  I would also suggest reading some marx who talks a lot about how even regulated capitalism cannot function. I would not start with capital though.

        • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          There was a fucking referendum where people voted for not dissolving the Union and it was ignored. It can’t go more undemocratic than that.

  • Facebones@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Dont forget the red scare whenever capitalism even thinks about faltering to remind us all of the evils of just giving hungry people food or letting them see a doctor.

  • 10_0@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Strongman leaders appear when the majority want them, too bad the strongman has to destroy the system as it is to make a difference

    • minorkeys@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think it’s more that strong men leaders get backers when the majority want them. All kinds of leaders are out there at all times, people swap their support to whichever they feel like at any given time. So when times get tough, half the population will side with power concentration, primitive but simple leadership structures. The other half want power decentralized and consensus to be required, the agreement of the majority, not be left with obedience to authority, which eliminates the ability for consensus or agreement. Nobodies needs matter except the needs at the top.

      It’s actually probably absolutely necessary that the GOP see Trump as sharing their interests. If you had to give up your power, you’d want to give it to whoever shares the most do your interests, so their exercise of power is more likely to benefit you. You wouldn’t willingly give to to someone whose interests were furthest from yours. And what an irony that Trump has convinced them their interests align. If we could break that assumption, people would find it much harder to hand over their power. But since Trump literally doesn’t care if he collapses America, he’s willing to give them things they want, regardless of the wisdom of it.

      God the GOP are the fucking worst.

        • comfy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          That’s the point of having two similar yet distinct characters. Most people don’t look at capitalism and see fascism, they appear distinct to most, so having them both be Homelander would be a poor visual analogy.

          • Rev3rze@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            To me, an ignorant person who has only begun to seriously question capitalism after being exposed to lemmy for about a year, this visual analogy seems to imply that capitalism and fascism are thought to be distinct in the eyes of the maker of this meme, though. I think the suggestion of having them both be homelander conveys a different message which seems to be the consensus here: they are different sides of the same coin.

            Admittedly, I’m out of my element here but I’m enjoying the exposure.

            • NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No you nailed it. The meme is a poor metaphor because it implies that the system has ever been superman or that OP believes it to have been superman.

              Or that capitalism only behaves like Homelander when times are tough.

              For many people Capitalism has always treated them like Homelander. For many people they’ve never seen the Superman fascade.

              So this meme reads as though the creator only recently learned some world history, or has some privilege in life but is becoming aware of reality for others.

              You could also fix it by just having Homelander say “I’m you!”

  • MidsizedSedan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Dam, i fully slept on The Boys. Thoughts its just a Watchmen ‘supers in real life’ rip off. First season on par with Breaking Bad for me

    • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s brilliant IMO (I haven’t seen the latest season but the one before … season 3 did feel like it was losing its way a bit).

      The thing with mainstream super hero stuff is that it seems to very much about supporting the status quo without really examining it. Generally, the MCU has been pretty guilty of this AFAICT. It’s also why Winter Soldier is probably the best MCU film IMO … Captain America becomes “the enemy” by standing up for his principles and destroys shield.

      The Boys is about examining the status quo and so stands out massively compared to all of the other mainstream superhero stuff.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s just too fucking dark for me. I don’t dislike a gritty show necessarily but I couldn’t make it through more than the first few episodes. It seemed good, but damn I have plenty of problems and shittiness in my real life, I like my entertainment to make me feel better, not worse. 😀

      • Eylrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Same. I like dark stories as much as the next person, but it hit way too close to home with real world politics for me.

  • greencactus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Fun fact: The nowadays conservative (and IMO right leaning) German CDU has originally considered capitalism to be the reason for outbreak for WW2. They wanted to form a new Christian Socialism, which would’ve united Christian ideals with a socialistic (not marxistic) economy. The so-called Kölner Erklärung was written in 1945 as a basic idea for where Germany should head from perspective of the CDU.

    These ideas didn’t last for long and got replaced by a conservative fiscal policy. But it is good to keep in mind that even in the CDU there were people who recognized that capitalism ultimately has a strong tendency to fuel fascism. In Nazi Germany, the main capitalists worked closely with the NSDAP - Krupp, Bosch, Bose (who famously designed the Nazi uniforms), Volkswagen were all lead by rich capitalists who saw (and gained) profit by the actions of the Nazis. It makes me sad that even the SPD, the so-called Social Democratic Party, long forgot what it means to fight for socialism and equality, and instead embraces neoliberalism with a touch of social politics.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      It makes so much more fundamental sense for the followers of Jesus to embrace socialist values as opposed to the tendency of Christians to follow both conservative and capitalistic politics.

      I’m an atheist but I was raised Christian Catholic and the stark contrast between the religious texts and parables with the actions of the average Christian or the Church was a great contributor to my rejection of religion. I still see value in some of the teachings (be nice to others, people before material things) and always took them closer to socialism values than the Supply Side Jesus right-leaning Christians adopted.

      • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Same. I always wondered how ideas like giving what you can, loving thy neighbour, and forgiveness to the extreme somehow results in Supply Side Jesus, “Protestant work ethic”, jail time for addictions, “law and order” politics, etc…

        These people have strayed so far from the teachings and I’m not sure how they can claim to follow them and then blame homeless people for being homeless.

        • ours@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Exactly, like all religions anybody can dig into the texts and find a justification for their personal and political views but the Jesus I was brought up with, while I don’t believe he existed, had some pretty decent key points (forgiveness, love, sharing, empathy, charity…). These contrast strongly with the judgemental, conservative, nationalist, racist “Christians”.

          They would probably have hung this “rebellious, commie jew” themselves today if their much-awaited second coming had taken place.

    • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Fascism is simply the conclusion of capitalism. Antifa is a bunch of socialists because socialism is the only cure. Anticomm and Fascism have so much overlap as movements because they’re the same movement. Even in the historical context of the first rise of fascism, who took the reins of power was people promising the capital holders they’d protect them from those scary laborers. And do you know what we don’t talk about enough in America? We don’t talk enough about why fascism didn’t take hold here. Its because in the 1920s the capital holders had seen what would happen in America if they tried to do a fascism: the coal miners rose up in violent revolt. We had what legitimately qualified as a civil war in West Virginia with the labor movement. It’s one of only two times american citizens on home soil have been bombed by an air force.

      My concern is this: we don’t have enough people in this country right now who love their brethren enough to stand against fascism. I ask everyone to do this: look at the Black Lives Matter movement. Realize what the African American communities right next to you are doing to resist the police brutality they experience, the fascism they are already experiencing and resisting. Join them. Link arms with them. The reality is the antifascist movement in America is nothing new. How we prevent fascism from rising is we make sure the violent weirdos know we are many and they are few. Make sure they know they don’t have the man power to take over

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Even checked Capitalism results in fascism, as Capitalism is entirely unsustainable and eventually results in the crisis that enables the rise of fascism.

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Maybe so. Maybe capitalism can never remain checked because the temptation to acquire more wealth will always end up winning. You’d like to think that people are better than that, buuuuut…

          • kaffiene@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Which system IS stable? AFAICT every system ever has allowed some people more power than others and those people cleave more power to themselves over time. This appears to be how most empires fall

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Good question! The oldest government still in operation appears to be San Marino, a tiny country near Italy, at around 415 years. Considering that even at a small size it’s only been around that long despite civilization being around 6000 years old, I think it’s safe to say we haven’t managed a system that has real staying power yet.

              • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                There’s hunter-gatherer tribes that have been more or less stable for over a thousand years. It’s said that the Nez Perce have lived on the Columbia River for 11,500 years.

                • samus12345@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Yeah, but for the purpose of looking at stable governments in cities, hunter-gather societies aren’t a helpful comparison.

                • kaffiene@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Good points but my question is more about governments that work at the scale of a nation state.

            • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              That is an interesting argument, but where is the proof? Economics is a very murky “science” as it is, a broad statement such as “capitalism is inherently unstable” needs some healthy data backing it up.

              The same argument could be made about communism, as an economic system it doesn’t have the best track record.

              Socialism seems to have a pretty good track record. But even in socialism there are issues, especially around ensuring a steady supply of kids coming through, once population starts falling the cracks start appearing.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                That is an interesting argument, but where is the proof? Economics is a very murky “science” as it is, a broad statement such as “capitalism is inherently unstable” needs some healthy data backing it up.

                Marx makes his case for it in Capital, specifically Volume 3, Chapter 13, though it’s easier to digest Wage Labor and Capital and Value, Price and Profit. Essentially, competition forces prices lower, and automation and increased production lower the price floor. Automation is pursued because it temporarily allows you to outcompete, until other firms can produce at the same price, forcing prices to match at a new floor. This continues.

                The same argument could be made about communism, as an economic system it doesn’t have the best track record.

                It can’t, because Communism abolishes this system. Communism has a good track record when properly put into historical context and is definitely the correct goal to pursue.

                Socialism seems to have a pretty good track record. But even in socialism there are issues, especially around ensuring a steady supply of kids coming through, once population starts falling the cracks start appearing.

                Socialism is just the precursor to Communism. The USSR, Cuba, PRC, Vietnam, Laos, etc. are/were all Socialist, building towards Communism, I don’t see why you say Communism has a bad track record but Socialism has a good track record, that seems contradictory. Further still, I don’t see what birth rates have to do with anything.

                • kaffiene@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I’d say that Marxism at least is fatally flawed. The idea that you start a Communist society by gathering all power to a central council is the issue. Once power is obtained it’s never willingly dispersed. This has been the fate of existing all communist governments

                • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  While I appreciate that Marx made a case, this is not data or evidence. It seems intuitively true, but that doesn’t really move you closer to real proof.

                  Essentially, competition forces prices lower, and automation and increased production lower the price floor. Automation is pursued because it temporarily allows you to outcompete, until other firms can produce at the same price, forcing prices to match at a new floor. This continues.

                  I’m not sure if you are trying to imply automation is a good or bad thing. Looking through history, the industrial revolution was bad for the workers of the time, but in the long run massively improved the living standards of everyone. Automation is a net good in my opinion. Competition is simply an accelerator, this is not really tied to the economic system being used. In capitalist or communist systems, firms that are protected from competition (by what ever means) do not innovate as fast or as effectively (see Intel as a great example of this).

                  Socialism is just the precursor to Communism.

                  While this can be true, it is not necessarily true.

                  I don’t see what birth rates have to do with anything.

                  As your population ages, the costs to care for them raise at an increasing rate. If you don’t have enough new workers to stabilize the economic base, the burden that an aging population places on the younger generation grows until it becomes untenable.

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              There are a lot of capitalist countries that haven’t collapsed yet. We’ll need longer than our lifetimes to see proof that it can never work.

              But I suspect that people in power just aren’t good enough to keep it from going bad eventually.

              • daltotron@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                I mean we do have a pretty good indication of a quite large impending factor which may cause a lot of them to collapse in the coming years, and which could collectively be attributed to them pretty well, especially within the last 50 years.

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                There are a lot of capitalist countries that haven’t collapsed yet. We’ll need longer than our lifetimes to see proof that it can never work.

                It’s more that it’s unsustainable. Collapse can be delayed, but not outright prevented as long as the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall exists.

                But I suspect that people in power just aren’t good enough to keep it from going bad eventually.

                It’s already “bad,” just constantly decaying.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I actually watches the first season of the boys recently. Killer show. Its stunning that any real person could have ever looked up to Homelander in any capacity.

  • Donkter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Capitalism is a form of economic organization, fascism is a form of government (or just a form of social control), antithetical to democracy or socialism.

    • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      yeah its totally just a crazy coincidence that fascism only arises in capitalist countries and that it does so when capitalism is facing a crisis, Im sure that the fact that the word privatization was coined to describe nazi economics is also just a coincidence, and certainly pinochet making all his economic policy based on the recommendation of the Chicago school of economics is also just a coincidence. The nazis giving medals to renowned pile of sub-human garbage and of course capitalist hero henry ford most also be just a coincidence. At every turn the fascists make it clear that they are capitalist and yet libs are so fucking deluded that they cant even recognize their own allies in the maintenance of capitalism.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      You can’t separate economic structures from State structures. Fascism is specifically a far-right entrenchment of Capitalism as a response to Capitalist decay.