lmao

marx failed to consider this one

apolitical

I already knew this meant "status quo warrior ashamed of sounding right wing" but recent interactions with federated Lemmy users have really hammered in what a bunch of bootlicking sycophants for capitalism tend to call themselves "apolitical" or "nonpolitical."

The water cycle? Kind of ridiculous to think all those rivers are working together, most of them only care about their own flow. The idea that they all work together to prop up an 'ocean' is ridiculous.

how do all the birds know where the flock is going? nature really is a mystery

Unless they are gathering in dimly lit rooms and saying "we are doing capitalism", it's not real capitalism

Man, people this bad at their jobs can get and keep jobs, why can't I?

I am a man who has never heard of emergence before.

Even at the lowest local level, governments grovel at the feet of businesses, dare they be seen as hostile to commerce

What does "high-status conspiracy theory" mean? Cuz every "high-status capitalist" seems to keep blaming the Jews without fail.

This guy is onto something in that liberals don't perceive actions by markets as coordinated political actions. They see it as invisible, since capitalism wasn't formed on the basis of markets explicitly, its formation was couched in more vague rhetoric about freedom, liberty, fraternity. Some aspects of the formation of capitalism took the structure of religious debate, like protestants breaking from Catholicism.

Whereas all socialist movements have been more explicit about the aims and goals. The communists don't hide their intentions. That makes a communist government much more obvious in it's pursuits to the average liberal. It's why statements like "communism killed 100 million people" makes sense to a liberal in a way that a similar statement "capitalism killed billions of people" doesn't make sense to them.

They don't see capitalism as an agreed upon movement or enforcement of certain hierarchies. They see it as full liberation of people and simply the natural consequences of full liberation. But they can see socialism as an enforced structure, since socialists don't hide what they're doing and socialism is formed by a single united working class interest. Capitalists aren't always in unison with one another.

How much do you want to bet this person has a hidden checkmark?

It's amazing how these people have somehow managed to read even less theory than the average communist.

Assuming he's not stupid and/or lying, looks like he's so annoying that despite being a think tanker, no business association is willing to invite him to any ! meetings.

we obviously just imagined the chamber of commerce and every other business lobbying group

“There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

• Warren Buffett

I can't get a business person to read their emails or attempt to understand their business even when a fuckload of money is on the line. The idea that they could have their mind changed about their desire for ownership and exploitation to live a fulfilled life in a world where we all suffer less is laughable. Their buy-in is incredibly solid. The idea that they'd strike a deal with a union more quickly than they would a CIA-backed mercenary group charging 20k to make the problem go away is ahistorical

"[insert random class here] are comically apolitical. They only care about their own [insert activity/property here]. The idea they all work together, as a class to prop up [contemporary social economic system here], is... not plausible"

Ok so that is the template now replace with the most comical examples you can think of

-Feudal lords/Castles/Feudalism

-Roman patricians/Villas/primitive accumulation(or slavery)

-Catholic Priests/Churches/Catholicism

So on, you're right its absolute dumbest shit but it also stems from the complete misunderstanding of what "politics" is as well, I mean what are the chances the random person on the street even knows the actual origin of the word? How many Americans think politics was invented in 1776 or even later?

Again, they're making up our position in an absurd way, and then getting mad about it so they can dismiss it.

We need to incept a new logical fallacy that covers this. I've noticed that people have been using "wh@taboutism" against neoliberals around the internet. It's not turning the tide yet, but it's making some heads explode. All of a sudden comparing two similar situations is ok and is no longer wh@taboutism. Unless you're criticizing Dems of course, then you're just helping trumputler

I’m guessing by political he means “woke or anti-woke” which is a stupid way to gauge how political one is to begin with, but even then it’s stupid because while most business owners might try to appear politically neutral publicly (as a means of avoiding controversy that might affect their business), when you get to know them you find most are very solidly chuds

It's not like most of them are cartoon villains who cackle and rub their hands together, jerking off at the thought of inflicting pain upon the poor.

It's more that they're sociopaths that don't give a fuck about it. And to whatever extent they or their lackeys DO have any humanity, they insulate themselves from the effects of their actions through many layers of management, outsourcing, etc.

And perhaps some of the smaller fries only do care about their business, but what's good for their business generally is good for the capitalist class. They donate to lobbyist groups that further the interests of the whole capitalist class, whether they are acting purely in their "own" interests. They lobby for local ordinances and tax breaks that achieve the same goal. You get the idea.

These groups and those that work with them are probably closer to cartoon villains though.

Tell me you've never read Marx without telling me you've never read Marx