Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | AndrewAndrewsen's commentslogin


Capitalism implodes on itself, just as predicted..


This isn't capitalism, it's pure corruption.


thats how capitalism implodes... its lives and breathes might makes right and the way to be mightier is to eat competitors and when you run out of competitors you use your might to change the rules. Corruption.


if everything is capitalism, then nothing is capitalism

"But one should not succumb to the illusion that with an analysis of the fundamentals of the capitalist mode of production that everything decisive has already been said about capitalist societies"

Michael Heinrich, Introduction to the three volumes of Capital


Very much a "true communism has never been tried" way of thinking.


Capitalism prescribes a limited role of government, to protect the rights of private citizens and maintain an orderly environment that facilitates proper functioning of markets.

This isn’t capitalism, it’s pure unfettered and uncontrolled greed.


"that wasn't real capitalism" hmm, where have I heard that before?


People have announced the implosion of capitalism many times and each time living standards have improved. In a purely correlationary sense, it seems like civilization progresses one capitalistic implosion at a time.


So you erode democracy, and now blame capitalism?

Hi, Europe chiming in here. We still have proper democracies combined with capitalism, and life is great here.

But hey, if you don't like capitalism, go to some country where they don't have it, like North Korea or Cuba.


Read Marx, he predicted so many things that would happen during the late stage capitalism phase.


And yet he gave us nothing in terms of what alternative economic would look like apart from a "a free association of workers" or something. Turns out it's a hard problem.


Marx couldn't probably come up with a solution in the 19th century. That was far too early. Luckily Deng appeared with the solution.


From my read of the Manifesto… while I may not have been impressed by the writing, that is from my perspective over 150 years later.

We got a lot of the things Marx was calling for. Of the 10 point plan near the end of section 2, we got:

- "2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax." today's rates look "heavy" by the standards of the 1848, even if we've also seen it decline somewhat from the peak.

- "3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance." not fully of course, but inheritance tax is absolutely a thing in a way it wasn't in 1848, and was one of the contributors to the decline of country estates in the UK.

- "5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.", again, clearly not as described, but the central banks do now direct how much credit costs for all the other banks, and financial regulation has changed hugely since then (even if some of this has also been falling away as quickly as the rich think they can get away with it).

- "6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State." has been on-and-off in the intervening time depending on where and which technology: the Royal Mail/USPS; I'm not quite old enough to remember the end of British Telecoms' monopoly on UK phones. For transport, likewise, depends on the specifics, does the British Highways Agency or American Federal Highway Administration count? Motor vehicles (let alone aircraft) came quite some time after the Manifesto was written, the tech of that era was shipping and canals, railways existed but the big boom hadn't happened yet. British Rail was a nationalised thing when I was young. Deutsche Bahn is still state-owned, but on the other hand British busses are private and I don't know how to think correctly about how British bus routes are run/bid for/regulated.

- "7. …; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan." (trimmed a bit I'm not sure about), Superfund site cleanup?

- "9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; …" (trimmed the absolutely-not part), this seems correct, given how industrialised farming is?

- "10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c." - done so hard we don't even want to trade with places that don't do it

Remember, the form of capitalism that Marx et al were fighting against was laissez-faire, which basically died with the Great Depression. It's not the form of mixed economics we have today which we still call "capitalism".


Yes yes I agree but none of those are a blueprint for communism per se. They are more transition measures in the hope that a new society will come out of it. Also is it only the work of Marx or collective authorship?

There's no blueprint for what Communism will be like. There is just this vague idea of some administrative entity that would replace distribution by the market IIRC


Too bad he couldn't predict what would happen in late-stage socialism (mass starvation and inequality)


>late stage capitalism

That period is defined as starting about 100 years ago, after WW1. 100 years later the "late stage" capitalism outlived communism in USSR and China.


If China is capitalist. Let's implement their form of capitalism in the West. Finally home ownership for 90% of the population. The English would be so happy.


they did


They briefly visited, they didn't "conquer"


The Vikings didn’t “conquer” new lands the way you might imagine. Rather than just raiding, they often settled, intermingled with the locals farmers and established new states.

As seen in Scottish Isles, Ireland, Danelaw (England), Ukraine, Faroes, Iceland, Normandy, Greenland, Newfoundland etc they sack some leadership but quickly integrate and evolve into mostly peaceful farming societies


> The Vikings didn’t “conquer” new lands the way you might imagine. Rather than just raiding, they often settled, intermingled with the locals farmers and established new states

There aren’t any the viking settlements in the Americas from that time? Or at least evidence of intermingling with the locals.


They got destroyed by the indians


Yes but that didn't happen in the Americas. They didn't settle or leave any lasting impact.


true, but it was an occupation tho. They had their own homes and made the questionable decision to stay there. ':)


Awesome project! I recently ran a (semi-)crowdsourced quality benchmarking for models ≤20b

How do you benchmark them? This would be awesome to implement at the page as well. I will link to this project at https://mlemarena.top/


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: