Hey there! Tell us what you like! Share your interests, you might find some other buddies who share interests with you. Either way, think of this as sort of a show and tell. Share as much as you’d like. Feel free to show/link some examples if you’d like. Let’s have fun with it =)!

  • cashmaggot@piefed.socialOPEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    I don’t think it’s just in-part due to legal corruption. I mean of course a SLEW of it is racism. Which is fucking bonkers, because white people left the cities to get away from poc only to come back and kick them all out (which is where we’re at right now). I don’t entirely understand this world, let alone this country but I bang my head when I have a solid think about it.

    Capitalism is for sure flawed. I am not sure what the equivalent would be that could be replaced large scale that would sit harmoniously with others and in that sense I am also at a loss.

    I think the concept behind the chaos of anarchy is that the lack of a social contract is in fact what instills the chaos. Because people do not operate well in a space without them. Which I think…was documented with violence. As in, people used to lean heavily on retaliation murder prior to democracy being instilled. But this is just something I am parroting which is a faint memory from my studies. Personally? I don’t know. I do think though, that people without regulation are chaotic in the sense that no matter how much I want to be a “good boss” I always end up being a “fun boss” instead and people only do as much as they think they can get away with doing instead of doing what seems to be the right amount of work for the greater good. This could be a personal bias thing - or just a personality thing in general. I don’t know much else about it though, and these are just some loose thoughts on the matter. Feel free to toss more this way though.

    • Halasham@dormi.zone
      0·
      3 months ago

      Capitalism is for sure flawed. I, and most if not all leftists, would argue that it is inherently flawed. Not in small ways either but in the sort of large ways that make it’s continued use unacceptable. Such as essentially every Human need being denied to some people within the system.

      Capitalism obsessively distributes by market forces that are fundamentally incapable of caring about universality. So long as any human need is distributed by market forces, especially paired with profit as the driving incentive, it doesn’t matter how large the surplus of it is people will be deprived of it.

      I think the concept behind the chaos of anarchy is that the lack of a social contract Well, there’s also the matter that Anarchism and Communism were both relatively recently the targets of the largest and most prolific propaganda machine ever made. US media is incredibly sycophantic toward the government, to the point Russian state media bucks the line more frequently, and has been extremely effective at coloring public opinion on topics the average person knows effectively nothing about, even beyond the USA.

      that people without regulation are chaotic in the sense that no matter how much I want to be a “good boss” I always end up being a “fun boss” instead and people only do as much as they think they can get away with doing instead of doing what seems to be the right amount of work for the greater good.

      You’re a manager? Part of the issue with motivating workers to work without systemic change is that regardless of your managerial style we live in a system where the primary motivating force is fundamentally a death threat: work or die, likely from exposure or starvation.

      Further no matter how good a manager you are they are not receiving the full value of their labor. No company in any capitalist nation employs people at the full value they produce as that would mean net profit for the company from that employee is $0. As the fundamental motivating force for all companies is increasing profit this course of action is effectively impossible as all decision-making at the topmost level is centered around doing the opposite of giving the full value they receive.

      Given that workers, from the company’s perspective, are there to do as much as possible for as little as possible in return is it any wonder that so many of them take the inverse perspective? That they are there to do as little as possible for as much as possible in return.