@lemmy.world @lemmy.ml (thelemmy.club)
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by to c/memes@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 6 days ago (3 children)

@TheDemonBuer

Yes good points. There are of course also plenty of other examples of capitalists asking the state to protect them from competitive pressures, for example with tariffs.

Whether capitalism without competition is still capitalism is a matter of decades of debate.

Some scholars have felt the need to add an adjective, like monopoly capitalism. Others, like Varoufakis, are exploring other terms, like technofeudalism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago (2 children)

    Whether capitalism without competition is still capitalism is a matter of decades of debate.

    because the word "capitalism" just doesn't have a coherent definition

    Free trading of goods and services on markets has been a thing for pretty much the entire existence of human civilization; so have property rights. If those are the things that define "capitalism", it's extremely difficult to imagine a world without it; if they aren't, then which are?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 0 points 5 days ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago

    OK, that's an interesting analysis and certainly one possible way to think about historical developments; the parts that are unclear are (1) whether this is trying to argue that the transition from feudalism to capitalism might be a bad thing (not something I've seen argued a lot) and (2) what, then, is socialism/communism?

  • source
  • parent