• samus12345@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Maybe so. Maybe capitalism can never remain checked because the temptation to acquire more wealth will always end up winning. You’d like to think that people are better than that, buuuuut…

    • kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Which system IS stable? AFAICT every system ever has allowed some people more power than others and those people cleave more power to themselves over time. This appears to be how most empires fall

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Good question! The oldest government still in operation appears to be San Marino, a tiny country near Italy, at around 415 years. Considering that even at a small size it’s only been around that long despite civilization being around 6000 years old, I think it’s safe to say we haven’t managed a system that has real staying power yet.

        • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          There’s hunter-gatherer tribes that have been more or less stable for over a thousand years. It’s said that the Nez Perce have lived on the Columbia River for 11,500 years.

          • samus12345@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yeah, but for the purpose of looking at stable governments in cities, hunter-gather societies aren’t a helpful comparison.

          • kaffiene@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Good points but my question is more about governments that work at the scale of a nation state.

            • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              6 months ago

              I think it’s possible that nation states are inherently unstable. An improvement on monarchy, but still vulnerable to oligarchy.

              I’m not sure what the future holds, or what comes next, but I suspect that federation will play an important role.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        There are a lot of capitalist countries that haven’t collapsed yet. We’ll need longer than our lifetimes to see proof that it can never work.

        But I suspect that people in power just aren’t good enough to keep it from going bad eventually.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          There are a lot of capitalist countries that haven’t collapsed yet. We’ll need longer than our lifetimes to see proof that it can never work.

          It’s more that it’s unsustainable. Collapse can be delayed, but not outright prevented as long as the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall exists.

          But I suspect that people in power just aren’t good enough to keep it from going bad eventually.

          It’s already “bad,” just constantly decaying.

        • daltotron@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          I mean we do have a pretty good indication of a quite large impending factor which may cause a lot of them to collapse in the coming years, and which could collectively be attributed to them pretty well, especially within the last 50 years.