cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/45369155
this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2026
148 points (99.3% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
3026 readers
382 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No, people want to feel fulfilled in their life but have been socially conditioned by our individualist, consumerist, hyper-capitalist culture to conflate the accumulation of monetary wealth and commodities with being fulfilled. Yet, being wealthy or having a lot of stuff doesn't fill that need. So, instead of being introspective of their desires to find the flaw in their internal reasoning, they continue to believe that the issue is that they just need to accumulate more. This mentality just creates a cyclical logic chain that traps people into behavioral habits that will never solve the root problem.
The problem isn't people or "human nature". The problem is our culture and how our society is structured to reinforce certain beliefs and behaviors.
Right, so for most people there's no such thing as enough. I didn't say it was "human nature," necessarily. Perhaps it is cultural, idk. But as of right now, it is true that if you asked most people how much money is enough, they would answer, "more."
Now, maybe we as a society need to say to some people, "sorry, but you can't have any more." I would agree with that. But, it doesn't seem like enough people are on board with that. Maybe because a majority of people see the very rich and high income earners as aspirational figures. Regardless, this is where we are.
Just because this is where we are doesn't mean that we must stay here. The entire point is to change how things are and to do that we must understand why things are currently the way they are and educate others so they can get on board with fixing the problem.
So, yes, we already know this is where we are, the entire point is that where we are is a problem that needs to be solved, not accepted as an immutable fact of life.
I just don't know what change you can get people on board with. I mean, of course, people don't like that everything's getting more expensive and that the traditional middle class lifestyle is getting further out of reach, but for most of those people the only solutions they want to hear are the ones that involve them making more money. They might also listen to the solutions that would bring prices down, but not if it means recession, higher unemployment, lower wages, and a debt crisis.
Everyone's just trying to make enough money so they can escape. It's like the ship is sinking and everyone's scrambling for a lifeboat. Everyone knows there aren't anywhere near enough lifeboats for everyone, they know most people will go down with the ship, and they're hustling and grinding out of a hope that maybe, maybe they'll be one of the lucky ones.
How do you fix that? How do you "fix" a sinking ship? Isn't it kinda too late at that point?
Edit: the only way we could possibly hope to fix things is through collective action, but people (at least people in the US) associate anything collectivist with a loss of individual control. And, they're not wrong. You do have to give up a certain amount of control. That's absolutely terrifying to most Americans. We're rugged individuals. We're our own sovereigns. We are each kings or queens of our own little kingdoms of one. Telling an American to abandon their sovereignty and join the group is sacrilege. It's asking them to willingly apply shackles and chains.
Just because the goal is difficult doesn't mean it isn't necessary.
The American culture of hyper-individualism is a problem that needs to be solved. We do it through agitation and grassroots community building. Direct Action and Mutual Aid. Educating each other in the principals of a new culture and then practicing it through action.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ronald-a-young-anarchist-agitation-community-building
Collectives are communities of individuals. What makes a collective powerful is the fact we are all individuals with our own strengths and through combining our strength can we have power to shape our lives. When each individual is respected and they are ensured autonomy over their life, they are more than willing to work together with others to protect their mutually shared prosperity. Educating people that being a part of collective action does not necessitate abandoning your individuality or autonomy is priority number 1 in the US towards the goal of building a community capable of resistance.
I think that sounds great. I mean, who doesn't want to have their cake and eat it too, right? Except, it's not possible. You can't both have the full piece of cake remaining on your plate and have eaten it too. If you eat the cake, you don't have it on your plate anymore, and if you have your cake on your plate, you haven't eaten it yet. The two things are mutually exclusive.
But, maybe individual autonomy and community aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. I'm willing to entertain that, even though I've been conditioned my whole life to believe that they are. But just because propaganda is effective, that doesn't mean it's true. Still, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't at least a little skeptical.
In these communities of individuals, would there be any limits placed on individual autonomy? It seems like there would have to be. The community would have to have some rules and laws that everyone was expected to follow, I would assume. How would those rules be enforced? How would the rules be enacted? Through direct democracy? Would it require a unanimous vote or would a simple majority do? If the latter, what about the dissenters? Would the people who didn't vote for the rule be expected to adhere to it?
Read up on anarchist theory cause it says the exact opposite. It is entirely possible through decentralized, horizontally structured systems of authority.
I'm not going to sit and spell out an entire government structure to you but Anark on YouTube has good, very informative videos if you want further information, and then there are always the works of anarchist authors like Kropotkin, Malatesta, Ursula K Le Guin, etc ...
You can also read the zine linked.