Capitalism encourages narcissism. It strives on it. Corporations themselves are narcissistic entities. A system not built on individualism and greed would help.

What id call modern democratic socialism makes use of cooperative economics. Both state run and stateless socialism (cooperatives) have already proven just, fair, equitable, sustainable, innovative …

There’s an Epstein email about Donny sucking off someone going by Bubba. People are speculating this is Bill Clinton because he’s gone by that name, but its also a nickname given initially by a small child that can’t yet properly pronounce the word brother.

The capitalist apparatus requires emmense effort to maintain. Military, police, propaganda, bailouts,… Its not self sustaining and its not natural. For comparison, cooperative, democratically controlled workplaces, have greater survival rates than their conventional, privately owned firms. Not to mention workers or more likely paid a living wage, have greater job stability and satisfaction, and just as likely, if not more so to lead to innovation. Its literally proven a better economic system, but yet some still think it offers empty promises.

More like every time there’s been democratically elected socialists or communists, western powers intervene with staged coups, assassinations, or embargos.

This is the answer, folks. I learned from an old 3 star michelin star chef, and chefs all have anger issues.

Nonviolent resistance movements are more likely to facilitate transitions from autocracy to democracy, improve democratic qualities like civil liberties, transform security forces and judicial systems in rights-respecting directions, and enhance well-being measures such as life expectancy.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2452292924000365

The commonly held belief that most revolutions that have happened in dictatorial regimes were bloody or violent uprisings is not borne out by historical analysis.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_revolution

Empirical evidence strongly favors strategic, organized nonviolent resistance as the most effective path to sustainable political change.

Political assassinations are a tool of desperation. They’re effective at creating instability and further violence; counterproductive for achieving lasting political goals. They fail to eliminate the ideas, movements, and structures that person represented.

There’s a Wikipedia page on nonviolent revolutions, so is violence itself necessary or is the threat of violence sufficient? History may not actually be in complete agreement in favor of violent resistance.

“Nonviolent campaigns have a 53% success rate and only about a 20% rate of complete failure. Things are reversed for violent campaigns, which were only successful 23% of the time, and complete failures about 60% of the time. Violent campaigns succeeded partially in about 10% of cases, again comparing unfavorably to nonviolent campaigns, which resulted in partial successes over 20% of the time.”

https://www.ericachenoweth.com/research/wcrw

I understand its probably more user friendly, but yet I still somehow find myself dissapointed the answers weren’t indexed from zero. Was this LLM written in MATLAB?

Literally tried looking for a jinx text editor for a minute

Briefly looked into it, and found an old stack post that said we know at least one is irrational. It would be pretty interesting if the other were rational.

I advocate for a cooperative economy. The best example of it working at scale in the modern world is the mondragon corporation in spain.

I think people are more than that. The point being that nothing is inherently wrong with making individualistic self serving choices except when there is disregard for others. But people can also be compassionate, alturistic, giving, and cooperative, so how about a system that rewards the better parts of human nature?

Capitalist markets are built off of the idea that people are inherently self serving and the ensuing competition will benefit people with lower prices, better products, etc to meet their own selfish needs. Capitalism uses capital to gain more capital, and is exploitative by design. When a company acts in a way to maximize profits, and appease shareholders, they’re doing it selfishly, with total disregard for others or the environment, in a system that rewards their actions. This is quite like psychotic, or sociopathic, behavior.

I just think trying to control this is a losing battle, and what we really need are foundational changes to values, motives, and what gets rewarded and how.

The way all of this is discussed and phrased paints a sort picture, in some peoples minds, of white men being evil. The problem is that this capitalist society is too isolatating, individualistic, and distracting for everyone to properly empathize with the struggles of others, so we end up with these people on the defensive. We’re left with a portion of the population supporting a proper biggot like trump to now justify they’re own existence.

If only we could have all been properly educated… but its all just distracting from the fact that everyone suffers from an oppressive and exploitative system, some more than others. But its probably about time for a more uniting class conscience form of rhetoric.

We’re all messed up because we’ve built a society that isolates and exploits us while rewarding psychotic behavior via corporations or people acting selfishly without regard for others

Now if only I could afford the van, I too could be homeless. Just like I’ve always wanted.

I imagine if they were properly communist, the US would have never allowed them to rise. There’d have been assassinations, coups, and purposeful destabilizations like we saw in south america.

I think its way healthier and I wish this was the common sentiment.

Who paid for this floor?