this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024
1098 points (97.6% liked)

Socialism

5184 readers
5 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Allero@lemmy.today 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

We have not "allowed" corporations to get big - they always will, that's the inevitable outcome of capitalism. Being bigger is always more economically effective, and capitalism is all about economic efficiency as it's direct means to produce more money. The corporations of today were literally predicted in the 19th century, and look where we are.

Capitalism cannot exist without the premise of consolidation and expansion - it is the driving force that motivates people to do something in a capitalist economy in the first place.

As wealth and, essentially, power consolidates into fewer hands, we face the same challenges - only now we have to deal with completely unelected authority that owes us nothing. Their downfall can have rippling effect on the entire economy, causing insane crises which, in turn, can quickly spiral out of control as markets are prone to vicious circles. Quite a few capitalist economies faced severe crises for seemingly stupid reasons.

Socialism, on the other hand, doesn't have to revolve around profits and monopolization. While economic efficiency that comes with centralized control is certainly hugely beneficial, we can build economy in any other way in order to make it more robust should we want to.

Soviet Union had telephones, and they were commonly used by everyday citizens - at home in cities, and through telephone boxes in villages and remote areas. I don't know where you take that from.

As per Internet, Soviet Union was developing a similar technology (OGAS, essentially dial-up Internet) since 1962. At first, it was designed to connect factories to better allocate resources (something that is now done by corporations and their logistics departments) - something that stemmed from the limitations of the time - but nothing stops the technology from being used on a residential scale, as fairly modern telephone lines were already there and new cables weren't a big issue.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca -3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

We have not “allowed” corporations to get big - they always will, that’s the inevitable outcome of capitalism.

Yup, and it's inevitable that weeds will grow in one's garden and it's inevitable that the viscosity of oil will break down in an engine and it will seize up.

Many things require maintenance. Capitalism is not different. Gotta do some trust busting now and then. Add some regulations on some industries in places where it makes sense.

Capitalism is a machine, and like any machine you have to do maintenance so it works well. Just gotta change the oil sometimes, no big deal.

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

Except none of those things try to take over the state through bribes and corruption. Capitalist enterprises do exactly that. How do you solve that problem?

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Regulations are great, and we should have them; however, there's a reason they don't end up reversing the trend.

That's because if the capitalist enterprise doesn't grow, it stops existing. The very reason companies exist is the premise of them getting bigger, producing ever higher profits. Otherwise, the investments don't come, liabilities accumulate, and company dies.

You literally can't have one without the other, growth and profit are key drivers of capitalism. The very premise of growth is what makes these companies worthwhile for investors and owners. Without it, there is no sense in starting an enterprise in the first place.

(Also, for the sake of clarity - it's not me who downvotes you. Feel free to keep the discussion going, I have no issue with it)