If you exclude a certain population from practicing capitalism, then you have a national syndicalist setup.
Capitalism is the most moderate economic ideology, only compatible with the center left (social democracy), up to the center right.
Furthermore, capitalism is not practiced if opposing view points like homosexuality and consumerism are not respected.
The bare minimum of regulations handling things such as poisoning food, putting chalk in bread, or exchanging child pornography are not features of capitalism but are necessary nonetheless.
Economic ideologies Yes. The answer is yes. Elaborate, with or against me revolutionary antiliberalist marxicunt
Colton White
its the basic lolbertarian argument that because capitalism isn’t being practiced in the way that you like it isn’t real capitalism
Gabriel Bennett
Retarded and that wasn't the point of the post. The point of the post is separating more reactionary ideologies from capitalism.
>The bare minimum of regulations handling things such as poisoning food, putting chalk in bread, or exchanging child pornography are not features of capitalism but are necessary nonetheless.
Read that in the post. No economic ideology can ever be purely one ideology. We nationalized roads, our postal service, haven't we? Those are good things, not gonna make us not capitalist. Bajeesus, I hate arguing with redditors.
Asher Wood
how are homosexuality and consumerism opposing?
Henry Mitchell
Also not pertaining to the OP post, but that argument coming from lolberts is stupid because organized and government spending is done through representation. With representation, the most an organized and government done use of tax dollars can be attributed to is classical marxism. See: social democracy
Jose Foster
so your point is that those policies are socialist? whats this have to do with lgbt anyways >Bajeesus, I hate arguing with redditors. ive never used reddit but you do use reddit spacing i notice
Charles Jones
This is happening to us bc of that stupid 9-point political quiz isn’t it
This sounds like GPT-3 gobbledygook, only less coherent.
Chase Garcia
Yes, they are. Again, no economic ideology can be absolutely pure. The "not real x" argument is and will always be stupid.
Andrew Nguyen
capitalism isn't moderate. and obviously regulations aren't inherent to capitalism. of what are you saying consumerism is an opposing viewpoint, homosexuality or capitalism? if so that's retarded. capitalism is also very easily aligned with conservatism and sometimes with fascism or socialism, not just liberalism.
lol
Adam Gonzalez
This is the 'bUt tHaT wAsN'T rEaL cOmMuNiSm' cope but for liberals. You certainly CAN try to handwave all flaws and examples of your preferred economic and political system doing bad things by claiming that it's "not REAL (ideology)." But that isn't an intellectually serious position. For one thing, I can define capitalism in such a way that it is perfectly capable of tolerating discrimination, immoral transactions, etc. For another, literally any example I give of capitalism or liberalism resulting in a bad thing happenind can simply be handwaved, under your logic, as 'not real capitalism.'
Levi Martin
i guess? seems like a semantic argument considering all that still exists under a capitalist system at its core
Lincoln Morgan
Define capitalism. Look it up right now. Any dictionary.
Not compatible with the far right or the far left. Instead of trying to redefine a word, use a different word.
Did the nazis respect jewish owned private property? Did they respect the market? Did the bolshveiks ever do any of those two things?
Capitalism requires liberalism. Liberalism of course, doesn't require capitalism.
>consumerism is an opposing viewpoint, homosexuality or capitalism Where did I say this?
Levi Hughes
>Define capitalism. Look it up right now. Any dictionary. >Not compatible with the far right or the far left Lmfao, you could absolutely have a completely authoritarian undemocratic shitpile government and also comply with this definition. Polisci sophomores get more and more deluded by the DAY
nta but there authoritarian countries even around today that employ capitalism to some extent or another to economically bolster themselves. I’m not even against libtardism, but the points you’re making ITT are just weird.
Blake James
didn't say far right or far left. i said conservatism, fascism and socialism, all of which are broad spectrums that can overlap with capitalism. see: nazi germany, scandanavian demsoc, american republicans
>Did the nazis respect jewish owned private property? no, but they still had currency and markets and some private corporations and labor in exchange for money which was exchanged for goods and services. still capitalism, if handicapped
>Furthermore, capitalism is not practiced if opposing view points like homosexuality and consumerism are not respected. what does this mean. what are the opposing view points
Gavin Ward
i cant side with the commies because they killed pavel florensky and now i have no more art history essays to read ;( i dont know about any of that socioeconomics and politics tho
Dylan Jackson
ok but this is an LGBT board + who asked?
Michael Campbell
fuckin gay ass thread
Connor Murphy
>leftypol tranny forgets where she is
Levi Butler
Yes, you could have authoritarianism but you can not be totalitarian as the actions of a state affecting private industry would nullify the essence of capitalism. A good example of this would be a state with a powerful police force but no major government involvement in the economy. Far right ideas like that of purging demographics of people or controlling what an industry can do or make don't jive with the definition you posted.
Liam Bennett
>fascism and socialism Fascism is not broad. It's a hyperspecific form of totalitarianism that is reactionary to all ideologies opposing it, including socialism, this by definition sets it on the far right.
Socialism of course, isn't very specific, and can range from democratic nationalization of industries all the way to marxism leninism, but capitalism can't jive with socialism either as it's basis is the abolishment of private property.
Nazi germany's control of the economy and disrespect for private ownership (you cannot disprove this. From party views [i.e read the biography I Paid Hitler] to your ethnicity played a role in whether or not your autonomy of property was respected) sets them outside of the realm of capitalism and in the far right. >but they still had currency and markets and some private corporations and labor in exchange for money With terms and conditions™ that put other basic regulations to shame.
>what does this mean. what are the opposing view points My bad. I worded that wrong
If, antiliberalism is practiced, then capitalism isn't practiced. Opposing view points in this sense, being opposing not necessarily to capitalism but to an individual.
