• protist@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There are serious ethical problems with a capitalist system, especially when it comes to the necessities of life, but there’s also ample evidence that other economic systems in practice have been just as bad if not worse regarding food security. Trace the history of the USSR from the Holodomor in the 1930s to empty grocery shelves and bread lines in the 1980s, for example

    • fidodo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I view the problem as us treating a tool as a system of government. Capitalism is an incredibly powerful tool for increasing efficiency (real capitalism as in a healthy free market, not monopoly bullshit). But we should be using that tool to our benefit, not having that tool use us. We can use it as a tool without it being our basis of society. Also, capitalism is not self regulating. That’s a bullshit myth created by elite monopolists. Unchecked capitalism leads to monopolies and monopolies are the antithesis of capitalism. We used to know that. We used to bust monopolies. We need to learn when and when not to use capitalism. Certain things need to be monopolies. Like transportation and the power grid. Since healthy competition cannot prosper we cannot make them capitalistic. We already need to recognize that capitalism is a tool for us to use. It’s ok to break capitalism in special circumstances for the greater good, because the good of the people is more important than perpetuating capitalism. I think abolishing it leads to apathy and inefficiency, but worshipping it leads to inhumanity, and we’re not even worshipping it properly because again, monopolies are not capitalism. Like all things in life it’s about balance.

    • sverit@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, the problems are just different. A mixed form would be ideal, where basic needs would be handled socially and the rest may compete in a capitalist way. The difficulty is where to draw the line exactly.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well it wasn’t so much a problem to Russians because their centralized economic system allowed them to simply starve away those they didn’t like

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Crown corporations/co-ops/worker owned companies for essential needs, capitalism for all non essentials.

      Tada!

    • aname@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I cannot comment on communism as there has not been a true communism in the world yet, but dictatorships sure have been bad.