Arguments for capitalism that hinge on a self-interested human nature fail precisely because it is in the self-interest...

Arguments for capitalism that hinge on a self-interested human nature fail precisely because it is in the self-interest of the majority of workers to band together and violently overthrow property-owners and bosses of all stripes. Capitalism does not at all appeal to our base, selfish instincts. Rather it demands we submit totally to pre-existing property relations and to remain docile while a very few enjoy immense wealth at the expense of the many. Capitalism is not rooted in greed, it is rooted in the illusion of greed.

ok

>individual self interest is the same as collective interest
lel

That meme's terrible.
Please use more relatable characters

>what is free association for the mutual benefit of a plurality of individuals

Wow it's amateur hour at 6pm eastern time, huh?

woah

>the average Sup Forumsack

If you don't even know the most entry-level meme philosophers you have no business shitposting on the Internet.

>band together and violently overthrow property-owners and bosses of all stripes
Okay but this doesn't happen.

What exactly is anticapitalist about your pic?

>if I was the dictator my communism would have worked!

>implying you need to know anyone but pic related

Max stirner btfo's dumb communists

The solution to capitalism is not communism. Communism is a genocidal hoax and only leads to more suffering. The only viable solution is islamic economics.

Oh Germany. You're so close to reaching critical cuck mass. You're soon going to be made fun of as much as Sweden.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

>when your proof is so old it's literally black and white
Nice shitpost.

>EVERYDING I DON'T LIEK IS SPOOK IT'S NOTHING SO I WIN HAHAHA
this stirmer shit is so fucking embarassing, people IRL just roll their eyes after hearing such embarassing stuff

Moving goalposts, classic! The GPCR was less than fifty years ago and it took place in the most populated country on the planet on an unprecedented scale.

Poor people agitate for radical changes in property relations constantly. I'm not even arguing its value: you simply made the incorrect claim that "it doesn't happen."

That's not even conservative historical revisionism, by the way. You're straight up endorsing neoliberal status quoism.

But here's a color photo for you anyway, Hilldog.

>implying I posited communism as a viable solution to the problem of capitalist tyranny

The argument is that capitalism does not appeal to "natural" human greed as its advocates often claim that it does. Stay on topic.

Capitalism itself isn't the problem. Bolshevism certainly isn't the answer.

The problem is that our once patriotic, restrained model of capitalism where people sought to turn a profit for themselves with one eye on the public good has given way to a ruthless corporate oligarchy where maximizing profit at the expense of all else.

Fortunately we have a chance: Trump got elected on populist nationalism. We're getting that nibble at the apple.

What we need to do now is criminalize the ruthless corporate profiteering that has enriched the 1% class at the expense of ordinary Americans. With the power of the NSA to surveil: trump could have dirt on even the richest and most powerful of these billionaire leeches. He could jail the media jews, jail the banking jews, sieze the assets for the public good. It wouldn't be hard to convince the American public that many of the 1% have plundered the country from within. Right now it would be very easy to accept that remorseless profiteering at the expense of the public good is tantamount to treason.

It does appeal to the base selfish instincts of the ruling elite and that matters in the end. It isn't rooted in an illusion of greed, but in the actual greed of the people who matter.

Okay, so it only happened less than 50 years ago in a shit hole country filled with brown people? Also
>Poor people agitate for radical changes in property relations constantly
You're genuinely not worth responding to if you think this yet also pull up "evidence" from decades ago. You know shit like this won't happen in my country or yours.

>Fortunately we have a chance
>a globalist businessman with thousands of outsourced employees and more properties outside the country than in it was elected president

No, no, no. The election is over. This discussion is not for r/TheDonald spillover. This debate does not concern recent local developments on the contemporary world stage. Now shoo! Go on!

Thank you for actually addressing the content of my post. In fact, I agree with you.

Generally, though, apologists for capitalism do not claim that it only serves the self-interests of "the ruling elite." If they phrased it that way there would be blood on the streets tomorrow. Rather, you will hear over and over, and especially on this board, that somehow a system that relegates a great many individuals to poverty, starvation, and servitude appeals to the natural greed of those very individuals.

Stirner is instructive here, however, as he points out that workers' interests are not served by capitalism. If these individuals were actually to act according to their greed, they would seize and abolish property.

You're not even addressing the argument I made in the OP, boy-o. The abolition of property relations in Rojava is likewise not an historical event that took place "decades ago." It is occurring right now, in spite of Russian, Syrian, Turkish, and Islamist onslaughts on the Kurdish people.

Furthermore, that "shit hole country" is infinitely more important to the global economy than your down-under backwater, you Steve Irwin abortion.

(You)

This basically.

Anarchy is the destruction of society, Oligarchy and monarchy are exploitative systems that rely on the subjugation and delusion of the masses.

Synarchy is the answer.

Corporatist, national socialist society is the best, most efficient and progressive form of government known to mankind.

This is why the (((oligarchy))) is trying so hard to suppress it.

*raises paw*
anarchism is the only possible solution

>it's in your self-interest to overthrow the guy who knows how to run the company so your company fails and cant get anything done

commie logic

Not a commie, but the easy commie response is to democratize "know-how."

The manager is capable of running a company because he received such and such a degree of knowledge from a learning institution that was unavailable to the great majority of his employees. This has very little to do with the talent of the manager, but instead depends on the class position he was inserted into by virtue of his birth.

Also, in most cases the owner does not actually know how to run his company, he simply owns it and delegates managerial responsibilities to the capitalists one rung below him in the wealth pool.

Lets give the labor to the people's state then, see what happens.

>the people's state

It's almost like the budget cuts to your school district hindered your reading ability

>"The state rests on the slavery of labour. If labour becomes free, the state is lost.

>it is in the self-interest of the majority of workers to band together and violently overthrow property-owners and bosses of all stripes
No it is not.

This is your average lefte guys, he doesn't really care about politics he wants to show the world that he is smart by being smirky. Get fucked

What a terrible meme. Are you leftypol fags capable of anything that's not derivative garbage?

that's cute and all, until you try to violate NAP by treading on my private property and your lower half is blown off by one of my strategically placed anti-egocuck landmines