Anti-capitalist here: Our point is actually the same point as the one Anti-feudalists had. The consumer hostility observed under capitalism is simply a corollary.

▲

peyton 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

To be fair feudalism (the row-farming kind) kind of collapsed because people found better deals with the rise of trade and mercantilism and such. It wasn’t anything anybody needed to make points over.

IDEs seem headed in the same direction. Seriously, watching Codex rip apart binaries in parallel and Claude go from nothing to app in one prompt, I’m pretty sure there’s no need for me to look at any code. I’m fine using tools that just emit machine code if that’s more efficient.

▲

jimbokun 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

What if the generated app is sending your sensitive information back to Anthropic?

▲

runarberg 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is easier to imagine the end of the world then the end of feudalism.

I kind of like the story of how Malthus had his theory of societal collapse because he couldn’t imagine a better system then mercantilism. That societies would rather collapse then to end their colonial monopolies.

I see a similar theory today with around depopulation, that as society gets older and relatively fewer working age people there are, that society would rather collapse then we find a better system then Capitalism.

▲

jimbokun 3 days ago | parent [-]

What system works better when you have a very large number of elderly people who want to retire and very few young people to work?

▲

runarberg 3 days ago | parent [-]

Socialism, for one.

▲

jimbokun 3 days ago | parent [-]

You still have many people consuming and not producing, and much fewer people producing.

Capitalism or socialism doesn’t change that.

	▲	runarberg 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I am sure Malthusians could find similar reasons for why collapse was inevitable as the population grew. For example I can imagine a young Malthus debating with the elderly Adam Smith, and Smith saying something like: “When societies open up their markets, those big bulk carrying cargo ships will be able to ship the required food to the food scarce areas. And when they do, they will enrich them selves as well as the farmers whom they buy the crops from, as the price of the grain will be much higher in these over-populated regions”. The young Malthus, however, is not convinced and will reply: „Then the population will still grow, both in that ‘new market’ (as you call it), and among the farmers whom acquire that new wealth; and eventually those farmers will make wars or famine with the neighbors and those merchants over the scars resources. Societal collapse is inevitable.“

▲

OkayPhysicist 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

We most generally lump Mercantilism in with Feudalism. The transition to Capitalism came with the rise of Liberalism (not the American political definition, the political philosophy one), which involved a lot of revolutions.

▲

Imustaskforhelp 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

(I think I agree), Georgist here, Our point is also that these rent-seeking abilities (something which even the creator of capitalism famously hated the land-lords quite a lot)

This is the issue with something like Cursor and VC's funding because I feel like these private equities essentially seek rent in their own way by hollowing out the products from within, to maximize profits without doing efforts in a manner very similar to Rent-seeking, and most large companies also feel like a rent-seeking on the monopoly that they establish (like google or facebook)

I have made someone who was communist/socialist agree to georgism and I have had someone who was extremely capitalist agree to georgism, and to be honest, whether it be georgism or anti capitalism or socialism, I think that the world just wants a system where a person is treated with dignity within the economic cogs.

My opinion is that as long as we can all agree on the last premise about dignity for individuals within the economic cogs, we can all have meaningful conversations to make that a premise, hopefully a reality.

(I feel like the people who might deny dignity to people within this particular context, have either a bias/incentive to not look towards the problem, or are uninformed, or lack the energy to fight towards change within the system, and more importantly the _hope_ that the future can be better)

I am not hopeful about the current political systems (even around the whole-world at times), I feel like there should be more information and decentralization within politics.

Essentially, politics really just feel unaccountable to me, your vote really stops mattering to politicians if/when money starts talking. But technically, this system can be broken through with enough votes.

I really hope for a future where politics and politicians feel accountable and genuine, maybe even someone from down the street who we can have some chats with to actually know them.

Ironically or unironically, just as how the landlords pushed against Georgism/George within really making political difference, The same is happening right now as well where Online landlord monopolies dictate how people interpret and vote by using their algorithms/influence.

Politics like many other problems feel like a chicken and egg problem, like things work until they don't and things don't work until they do. At a more individual level, stepping outside of most algorithms and the reason why I joined hackernews is for doing something like this, myself.

	▲	runarberg 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Anarchist here. I can definitely see the appeal of Georgism. And if we must have a state (while we Anarchist work to dismantle the state apparatus) I am personally not convinced Communism is a superior alternative to Georgism. And I think you could probably convince many anarchists alike (as long as you strategically avoid mentioning the role of the state). And in either case, I will definitely stand next to a Georgist during the revolution in solidarity against Capitalism.