Capitalism, The Best Solution to Poverty

[Brian Peacock]

I went to Hobart once.



It was shut.

[pErvinalia]

It's changed a lot in the last 10 years.

[Scot Dutchy]

It has gone further downhill if that is possible.

[laklak]

Good shark fishing, too. Just put your kid in the boat, they jump right in.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/shark-gra ... y-tasmania

[NineBerry]

How trickle-down economics works

https://twitter.com/JuniaSchneider7/sta ... 4451396611

[rainbow]

How trickle-down economics works

https://twitter.com/JuniaSchneider7/sta ... 4451396611

I thought it had something to do with Trump and a couple of Russian prostitutes with full bladders.

[laklak]

Stop it, I'm getting moist.

[Brian Peacock]

Continues from: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1879353

Part of the problem here I think is that the term 'race' is most keenly associated with things like skin colour, genealogy, and/or geography...

That is not a problem, Brian. That's the definition of race. You can have racism without capitalism and you can have capitalism without racism. Each can exist without the other. Though they frequently interact with each other in major ways, racism is not a necessary component of capitalism. You have yet to convince anyone except yourself that it is.

By the way, do you think it may be a good idea to disentangle our discussion about capitalism and racism from this thread, which is supposed to be about the impending US election?

I didn't say that 'race' didn't mean those things, only that it didn't just mean those things - if you allow a political reading of race.

For context:

[...] I'm talking about those situations where racism acts as a kind of justifying ideology for Power. It's not the only justifying ideology, let alone the pure foundation of the ideologies of Capital Power, but nonetheless I think racism has been and is used as a tool to operate the system. Part of the problem here I think is that the term 'race' is most keenly associated with things like skin colour, genealogy, and/or geography, but it can also have political associations which are seen in the way that people and groups are defined as distinct or separate from the body populous, and then divested by Power of some element of their autonomy, rights and/or dignity in the process - a process which ultimately benefits Capital interests.

[Hermit]

Continues from: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1879353

Part of the problem here I think is that the term 'race' is most keenly associated with things like skin colour, genealogy, and/or geography...

That is not a problem, Brian. That's the definition of race. You can have racism without capitalism and you can have capitalism without racism. Each can exist without the other. Though they frequently interact with each other in major ways, racism is not a necessary component of capitalism. You have yet to convince anyone except yourself that it is.

By the way, do you think it may be a good idea to disentangle our discussion about capitalism and racism from this thread, which is supposed to be about the impending US election?

I didn't say that 'race' didn't mean those things, only that it didn't just mean those things - if you allow a political reading of race.

For context:

[...] I'm talking about those situations where racism acts as a kind of justifying ideology for Power. It's not the only justifying ideology, let alone the pure foundation of the ideologies of Capital Power, but nonetheless I think racism has been and is used as a tool to operate the system. Part of the problem here I think is that the term 'race' is most keenly associated with things like skin colour, genealogy, and/or geography, but it can also have political associations which are seen in the way that people and groups are defined as distinct or separate from the body populous, and then divested by Power of some element of their autonomy, rights and/or dignity in the process - a process which ultimately benefits Capital interests.

Wrong context. This is what I am objecting to:

- Capitalism is the over-arching system of Power.
- "Power" are just those forces and interests which devise, control, and enforce the systems by which society operates.
- Power has ensured and continues to ensure that racism is an endemic feature of those systems.
- Therefore Capitalism ensures or necessitates racism - in the same way that it ensures or necessitates exploitation more broadly, or the way it ensures and necessitates global warming and planetary death etc.

I highlighted the bit of my post and the assertion it is meant to be a reply to.

[JimC]

Capitalism can use many things to maintain its grip on power; racism is certainly one of them, if only in the context of "divide and conquer"...

[pErvinalia]

I don't think division favours capitalism. You don't want those being exploited to feel they are being exploited lest they rise up and bring out the guillotines.

[pErvinalia]

Although, having said that, it benefits the elite to blame immigrants for job losses instead of wearing the blame themselves for offshoring jobs.

[rainbow]

Capitalism can use many things to maintain its grip on power; racism is certainly one of them, if only in the context of "divide and conquer"...

Ita vero. Religion, class consciousness, nationalism ...

[Brian Peacock]

Although, having said that, it benefits the elite to blame immigrants for job losses instead of wearing the blame themselves for offshoring jobs.

There you go. A good example of Power necessitating racism.

==========================

Continues from: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1879353

Part of the problem here I think is that the term 'race' is most keenly associated with things like skin colour, genealogy, and/or geography...

That is not a problem, Brian. That's the definition of race. You can have racism without capitalism and you can have capitalism without racism. Each can exist without the other. Though they frequently interact with each other in major ways, racism is not a necessary component of capitalism. You have yet to convince anyone except yourself that it is.

By the way, do you think it may be a good idea to disentangle our discussion about capitalism and racism from this thread, which is supposed to be about the impending US election?

I didn't say that 'race' didn't mean those things, only that it didn't just mean those things - if you allow a political reading of race.

For context:

[...] I'm talking about those situations where racism acts as a kind of justifying ideology for Power. It's not the only justifying ideology, let alone the pure foundation of the ideologies of Capital Power, but nonetheless I think racism has been and is used as a tool to operate the system. Part of the problem here I think is that the term 'race' is most keenly associated with things like skin colour, genealogy, and/or geography, but it can also have political associations which are seen in the way that people and groups are defined as distinct or separate from the body populous, and then divested by Power of some element of their autonomy, rights and/or dignity in the process - a process which ultimately benefits Capital interests.

Wrong context. This is what I am objecting to:

- Capitalism is the over-arching system of Power.
- "Power" are just those forces and interests which devise, control, and enforce the systems by which society operates.
- Power has ensured and continues to ensure that racism is an endemic feature of those systems.
- Therefore Capitalism ensures or necessitates racism - in the same way that it ensures or necessitates exploitation more broadly, or the way it ensures and necessitates global warming and planetary death etc.

I highlighted the bit of my post and the assertion it is meant to be a reply to.

OK. I took your first post to be one which questioned the definition of 'race' - my point being that although race is primarily considered to be a matter of colour, genealogy/biology, and/or geography, to say that this is all or only what 'race' is or means leaves some important things out imo.

On the highlighted bit: I think it's pretty clear. If one accepts that Capital administrates Power in its own interests, then when Power deems racism useful (in the same way it might deem discrimination and/or exploitation useful more broadly), then we can pin that racism on Capitalism...

[...] I'm talking about those situations where racism acts as a kind of justifying ideology for Power. It's not the only justifying ideology, let alone the pure foundation of the ideologies of Capital Power, but nonetheless I think racism has been and is used as a tool to operate the system...

I accept that racism and Capitalism are seen as two distinct aspects of human affairs, yet Capitalism is the 'over-arching system' of human affairs, the one in which racism resides, in which it propagates, and in and by which racism's continuation is assured and enforced. As Power, if it's not necessary for Capitalism to eradicate racism -- and sometimes it's actually beneficial to Capital for racism to be propagated and enforced -- then Capitalism is necessitating racism.

I agree with your earlier point about how Capitalism necessitates exploitation, but where Capitalism exploits peoples on the basis of race it also necessitates racism - as indeed it always has.

[Scot Dutchy]

Capitalism demands inequality in all things. How it is attained does not matter which is why Capitalism breeds corruption. The two live off each other.