• Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    There’s no utility in defining it the way

    I ready described such utility in how it opposes our shallow images of “cApiTaLisM” (and meritocracy etc). Capitalism as instantiated doesn’t match our descriptions of it. Human greed is the constant engine. Liberalism emerged from that emergent environment, and in some ways helps maintain aspects of those systems. But corporations will never actually support any ideology, whether that ideology supports or opposes “capitalism.” Corporations (or rather the humans whose greed is their engine) will, at best, stab us in the eyes and ears with ANY fractured ideological images that gets them some near-term increase in power or profits.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      We are speaking largely past each other. Capitalism was not a choice, it emerged naturally from mercantilism and early industrial manufacturing within the boundaries of feudalism. It was never a choice to adopt it, it arose naturally as it subsumed everything else, extending the domain of private property.

      The utility of Liberalism is in its ability to affirm existing property relations. This is pressed down by the state, and additionally the large corporations. This is called “cultural hegemony,” capitalism is maintained by the ideological superstructure.

      Corporations, individual capitalists, etc did not choose capitalism, correct. They are the best at gathering profits. Capitalism as a system selects for them, because capital is a control system, if you fail to compete you fall.

      Power is only useful as far as it increases profits, because profits are what is systemically driven. Humans are not in control of capitalism, capital is.