Nature, red in tooth and claw. The competitive drive is not uniquely human but it is human nature.

This is mostly unfounded. Humans are cooperative, by nature. The dominant ideas of society are largely driven by Mode of Production. Capitalism is competitive, ergo Liberalism is the dominant ideology, but this is only the case within the myopic frame of the last few centuries. Mode of Production has shited with technological advancement, which has also shifted “Human Nature” with it.

Capitalism, for all its faults, tries to harness that nature for good.

Capitalism wasn’t designed in a lab, but emerged out of feudalism. It doesn’t “try” to do anything. Functionally, it services the maximization of profit, with little care for the wellbeing of society at large.

Every other system rests on an assumption of benevolence, either from the few (monarchies, dictatorships, oligarchies) or the many (communism, anarchies).

Incorrect, and unfounded. Please explain exactly why Communism rests on the assumption of benevolence, in any way, referring to the structures Communists wish to implement.

History has shown that assumption to be a fatal mistake.

More vague assertions, this time with the undertone that it is somehow ideas that drive history, and not Material Conditions. This is an anti-scientific, anti-Materialist assertion.

What reasons are those, exactly? Vibes? Vague idealism?

Because he’s labeled “IMF,” the biggest Imperialist tool in the world at the moment, and one working intimately with the US and the rest of the Global North. They take advantage of crisis in the Global South, often created by the Global North, by giving needed loans in a predatory manner and add conditions that they must privitize and sell to international companies.

This meme references Kenya and Haiti, the problems with which Putin and Russia are largely uninvolved while the US and the IMF absolutely are. You could create a different political meme with Russia and Ukraine if you want, but it would need an entirely different format, not just adding Putin to this meme.

Not every political meme denouncing the US and IMF needs to denounce Putin as well in the same meme, that doesn’t imply support for Putin.

1. Why are people stupid and lazy? Is this a new thing? Why are conditions worsening?

2. Correct.

3. Correct.

4. Kinda vibes-based but strikes the target. It’s less that lying is encouraged, but that profit drives the system and money greases its wheels. Follow the dollar.

Kind of. American Proletarians have a unique position of enjoying the benefits of a super-exploited class of domestic immigrants paid lower wages via threat of deportation, and Imperialistic hegemony, but are also enslaved by vast amounts of debt. This is very different from standard Capitalism, but not quite feudalism. It depresses the revolutionary potential of the American Proletariat for as long as Imperialism is the status quo.

What problems are there with the solutions he gives? Welfare Capitalism solves none of the problems with Capitalism Marx describes.

In what manner has Marx been wrong? Where in the history of Marxism has democracy not been core to the central ideas of it, especially when compared to Capitalism?

The question then is, why do people choose the way they do, both when buying and when running a company? To me it seems, they don’t because of some external pressure (like monarchy requires).

The ideas that people have are shaped by their Material Conditions, and people generally act in their best interests. People will buy what is available in the market, and Capitalists work to accumulate more and more money in an M-C-M’ circuit.

The point can be summed up as a question: Why don’t people run (more) non-capitalist services and productions, and why don’t they prefer them when looking to satisfy their demand?

These are 2 questions.

1. People generally don’t run Socialist services as frequently because in the framework of Capitalism, it is excessively difficult to gain the Capital necessary to start one, and furthermore the people with access to Capital continue to act in their own interests and accumulate more profit off of ownership.

2. People do not care where their commodities come from, largely, as they work for their income and thus their access is limited by the money they have.

These non-capitalist things exist, it’s certainly possible. But as far as I know, they are all very niche. Like a communal kitchen, some solidary agriculture or housing project. Heck, entire villages of this kind exist.

This is known as Mutual Aid, which is a big cornerstone of Anarchism. The issue is that Anarchism generally relies on individuals making the right decisions due to their horizontal structures and has issues with scaling horizontally. These structures tend to have great success locally, such as Food Not Bombs feeding people, but without strong organization scaling becomes difficult and action becomes unfocused.

So the alternative is there, but it requires actual commitment and work. I don’t see how capitalism could be abolished in an armed uprising (in contrast to monarchy). But it can be replaced by alternative projects. Partially. Why are they so small and few?

Why don’t you think Capitalism could be abolished via revolution? It’s been done before.

Secondly, it is not simply capable of being replaced entirely via parallel systems because that depends on individuals outcompeting the immense resources of the Bourgeoisie. It’s certainly possible at a local level, but at a state level takes enourmous power and unity.

Read Marx, everyone.

Which came first, the philosophy, or the Material Conditions?

In this instance, Idealism predates Liberalism. However, come the foundations of Capitalism out of Feudalism, Liberalism became the new idealist status quo.

I don’t think it’s quite accurate to say Liberalism is a product of Idealism, but that Capitalism as formed from Feudalism required an Idealist ideology, that being Liberalism.

So it’s more of a parallel advancement in thought, not that Liberalism came from Idealism and then Capitalism came. That’s a very “ideas focused” frame of analysis.

Correct me if I misunderstood you and we are saying the same thing.

For some reason Liberals become Ultras when criticizing Socialists. Liberals get the supreme benefit of careful nuance, contextual analysis, and critical support even in the face of genocide support, while Socialists are endlessly purity tested on vague senses of moralism, rather than Materialist analysis.

Liberalism and Idealism go hand in hand.

Imperialism is the primary contradiction in the modern era, and is the contradiction that must be fought against most vehemontly. The struggle against Imperialism in the Global South must be supported by workers in the Global North, as the struggle against Imperialism opens the door to progress.

Midwestern Marx is run by PatSocs.

Nah, I just want you to know what you’re talking about, pretty simple

I don’t think many people here are rich or think they are smart just because they use Lemmy.

What does “politically correct” mean? A correct take?

Yes, and thus there is a tendency for the rate of profit to fall.

Homophobia, racism, ableism, and more racism, lmao.

Guess Joe Rogan is too progressive for you, maybe Ben Shapiro or Nick Fuentes is more your speed?

Not even Australian myself lol

They’re lyrics, intentionally making the service worse for people with hearing disabilities is ableist.