HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

_oghd

no profile record

comments

_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
in the original article.... I quote:

>Towards the end of Technofeudalism, Varoufakis canvasses some proposals, drawn from his earlier book Another Now (2020), for how to address these issues. These include ending the cloudalists faux “free service” model and replacing it with a universal micro-payment model, instituting a Bill of Digital Rights, and using digital technology to “democratise companies” (with decisions being taken collectively by “employee-shareholders”)

employee owned coops are a major socialist idea, and are a definitive step away from privately owned capital, toward collectively owned production by the employees (proletariat, if you will).

so, yes. he does. in this article.
_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
> nor is Yannis Varoufakis even remotely advocating eliminating the notion of private property ownership.

uh, yes, he does.

> I try to create a vision of a liberal, socialist society that is not based on private property but does use money as a vehicle for exchange and markets as coordinating devices. I preserve money and markets because the alternative would be to fall to some fearsome hierarchical control, which, for me, is a nightmare scenario.

https://greattransition.org/publication/another-europe-is-po...

whether you agree with Marx or not, his description of capitalism is at the very least, complete. and it's his definition I used.
_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
capitalism is private ownership of property and the exchange of labor for wage to produce commodities with said capital.

capitalism is not just "free market economy," where the natural opposite as you supoose being "centrally planned economies"

this is essential to understand what varoufakis presents as a new relation to production: technofeudalism.
_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
can you elaborate on the difference between your definitions of distributism and socialism?
_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
when capitalism sublimates everything into commodity form, it's important to be reminded of the water we fish swim in.

Fun or Play can be considered useless if not being commoditized or sold, but of course they are essential. Byung-Chul Han has some nice books about this.
_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
personally, i adopt the marxist analysis of capitalism being a particular mode of production where private productive property is owned and controlled by the owners/shareholders and labor is exchanged for wages.

if we are going to make a distinction between feudalism and capitalism, surely we can similarly make a distinction between capitalism and X, instead of simply defining capitalism uselessly as "free markets" or "human nature." it's inclusive of the institutions which uphold these relations.
_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
longevity? uh... no. capitalism is very young in human society.

for clarity, feudalism lasted twice as long as capitalism has currently existed.

and while competition has dominated the scientific and cultural narrative for a while, that's not the exclusive interpretation, or even necessarily the best or correct one.
_oghd
·3 tahun yang lalu·discuss
https://xkcd.com/667/
_oghd
·4 tahun yang lalu·discuss
> The diatribe against capitalism is thus unnecessary

that would be true if you had no understanding surplus value. i highly recommend you at least try and read the first few chapters of Marx's Capital, which was quoted directly in the article.

notice profits are skyrocketing while wages are dead? "rising tide raises all ships" economics is dead.