crisis of overproduction due to an inability to be coherently planned

Is your claim planned economy is better? Because history shows planned economies tends to underproduce on necessities.

not to mention surplus value exploitation leading to enshittification

There’s still issues of people skimming, but because essential monopolies has been created historically. No one has others to buy from, so enshittification has no way to be challenged.

Capitalism is just really effective at sending signals back, as it hurts every part of the chain if the seller can’t sell their goods.

The one socialist society that almost succeeded their market, but USA unfortunately fucked them hi Latam, essentially build market signals into their models and wasn’t centrally planned.

like the tendency for the rate of profit to fall,

And why isn’t this a positive? Goods being traded at the cost to produce. Not at some random markup, just because.

Workers already run the world, we should own it too.

Cooperatives is the solution you’re looking for, and I agree. They work within capitalism.

Let workers inherit companies and you have the best of both worlds.

it belongs to whoever the ruling class of society is and takes on a definite form

And why can the majority not be the ruling class?

Scandinavian countries are imperialist

Two centuries ago, fair. Now? Not really, it does however benefit from knowledge transfer due to third world citizens seeking universities in richer countries.

it always results in the accumulation of wealth in few hands, who can then use that power to subvert democracy and get their way.

But that’s not really capitalisms fault. We’ve seen higher degrees of inequalities in socialist countries and feudal economies could be claimed the inequality is a part of the design.

It’s due to a lack of government rules.

Capitalism brings with it a complete alienation, communities don’t own their land, people don’t own their work

It opens up for the possibility of either owning your work or owning the value (wage) of your work. 2 millennia ago, when everyone worked in their own workshops and sold to the market, that was ultimately also a capitalistic economy.

Communities now can own their land, because everything is a commodity. Under other systems, the government, noble or other highly ranked owns the land and leases it out - We could argue that’s still happening under capitalism, through property taxes.

I’m curious if you can expand on the alienation.

That’s an incredibly offensive claim

Yet you’re not highlighting any, because capitalism is a tad too efficient. The alterations we seek out to do, does not stop capitalism; Just changes the goals of it and the late stage setup to move more power/capital back to the people.

But all of the top ranked countries are also capitalist economies

Because the people that “rage against capitalism”, tends to put a lot of rollover effects occurring due to no guardrails. Onto being a fault of capitalism, rather than a fault of government.

We could tax inheritance 100% and most of the rollover issues are gone.

We could provide healthcare, public transportation and many other services. While maintaining a capitalistic based system.

Infinite growth is not a necessity of capitalism, that’s a necessity for consumer franctic societies.

Right now there’s a lot of countries looking towards Scandinavian models, they’re capitalistic by nature and imo still lack guardrails against intergenerational wealth. Inequality is skyrocketing everywhere, but that’s not a fault of capitalism. It will happen in unregulated capitalistic setups, but capitalism is really effective at guiding companies into providing the goods the populations need - And we have not theorised a better system yet.

What are you talking about? The DPR requested Russian military assistance. If the DPR was legitimate and had the right to defend itself, then Russia sending troops in at their request was legitimate.

That has nothing to do with the full scale war. They’re two different conflicts.

I don’t believe countries have an inherent right to defend themselves, and if I did then I would say that the DPR had the same right.

It’s not the Donbas war I’m questioning, there’s a reasoning chain that’s understandable. Both geopolitically, strategically and culturally.

It’s the full scale invasion of 2022 I’m questioning. There’s no chain of thought leading to that invasion, other than greed and lust for blood by Putin and his inner circles. The nationalists were not in power by the time they began their invasion. They had already gained control of the region, Donbas, that wanted to be Russian.

There’s just no way to argue the full scale invasion should ever have started.

Somehow, the extreme anti-war stance of not supporting even “defensive” wars makes me a bloodthirsty warmonger

Your endgame argument is national states shouldn’t exist, but today they do. As long as they do exist, national governments should be able to defend against other nations attempt to gain control over them. Because if we do assume, at one point we get a global government and abolish the national states. Then it’s whoever carries the most power (that’s war machines), that’ll be able to decide the values of such a government. And by extend shape the culture that’ll impact everyone.

example, I think China is more democratic than the US.

Both countries are a clusterfuck from a democratic/people decides perspective. The way both countries are ruled is quite similar. They’re two sides of the same coin.

Because my metric for the level of ‘democracy’ in a nation is how closely that nations policies match the will of its people and how happy the people are with its policies

This is really hard to gauge for China specifically, because there’s as you noted no electorally elected officials.

Furthermore it’s an authoritarian leadership, known to punish dissidents. It’s a very complex topic to go into who benefits and who don’t, from the current Chinese policies. Chinas economy is as much, if not more, dependent on gig labour as the US is. The gig labourers are not in better conditions in China, than they are in the US.

It’s not unheard of that parents pay for their adult children’s medicine, because the only income their child could get was from a poorly paid delivery gig.

There’s an issue globally with the elites having grown more greedy, especially in the past four decades. I think one of US, UK, China or Russia is going to see their elite lose power and fall to a popular uprising. Before any other oligarchical society, at which all oligarchs are going to give crumbs back to the people.

Just like European royal houses gave more wealth and power to their commoners as a response to the French revolution.

XiJinpingStanAccount honestly sounds like a parody handle, I’d expect the likelyhood of such a user to actually favour Xi Jinping rather low.

Personally I don’t understand why we’d want less democracy, instead of more of it. Citizens assemblies is the logical move, for anyone wanting more power to the people - But I guess my views are closer to anarchist movements than anything, I don’t want to alter everything. I just want to kill intergenerational wealth.

So that was a lot of words to say nothing.

Do you think Russia is in a right to invade Ukraine?

It’s the most clear cut conflict in the world at the moment, anyone supporting Putin’s aggression has lost themselves to propaganda. Ukraine unfortunately didn’t get enough support early on, this conflict could had cost half the lives lost to date.

It’s miles apart to be against an aggressive occupational force with no clear goals, and not support a country’s right to defend itself.

Honestly it seems like they more or less identified all of the former unidentified users, and it turns out the vast vast majority of which are on unix based systems.

If this goes right down again, I’d imagine the unidentified users to go up - But would be a decent indication for a lot of traffic being scrapers