I liked this article, but a few things here I think we’re idealized.
“ Unlike a hunter-gatherer group, where an individual member starving would be seen as a collective failure, official capitalist ideology tells you that a person struggling on the street has got nothing directly to do with you, because you don’t really live in ‘a society’. You’re just an individual, free of attachment.”
Sure, maybe some hunter gatherer societies saw it as a failure, or maybe some saw that person as a threat to the community and they got abandoned or shot in the face. We’re just at the scale where instead of having a few of those people every decade we have thousands every year.
Communism has similar failure cases. Sure maybe everyone gets a similar share and no one is “starving” unless your part of the outgroup, or maybe if you’re part of the in in group, you also get extra benefits.
“ Unlike a hunter-gatherer group, where an individual member starving would be seen as a collective failure, official capitalist ideology tells you that a person struggling on the street has got nothing directly to do with you, because you don’t really live in ‘a society’. You’re just an individual, free of attachment.”
Sure, maybe some hunter gatherer societies saw it as a failure, or maybe some saw that person as a threat to the community and they got abandoned or shot in the face. We’re just at the scale where instead of having a few of those people every decade we have thousands every year.
Communism has similar failure cases. Sure maybe everyone gets a similar share and no one is “starving” unless your part of the outgroup, or maybe if you’re part of the in in group, you also get extra benefits.