“Consumerism” isn’t an actual system. It’s just describing people consuming goods with a negative connotation. There’s nothing to critique or change about consumerism, there’s no way to attack it outside of personal blame games of saying “individuals needs to be less greedy” (idealism). Capitalism is an economic system, one well studied and implemented throughout the world. Something that controls our societies, something that could be changed via political will. You really have only stuck your toe in the water here and lecturing people who swim all day.
This would be like a medieval peasant saying “I don’t oppose Feudalism, I only oppose pilgrimage and the constant festivals”. Like ??? You are mistaking a coping tendency under certain conditions for the system setting the conditions itself.
One is an epoch spanning economic system, a thing unto itself, the other is just some small offshoot describing what some people do. Not a thing itself, just a description of personal tendencies as they arise from the conditions they exist within.
Also, Capitalism =/= Markets. Markets and trade existed before capitalism in feudal and pre-historic societies even. Markets existed under socialism as well. Please learn what capitalism is.
While I did enjoy your verbose writing, it kinda feels to be coming off a pedestal. I get that this place gets a lot of trolls, but just looking at the reactions I’m getting from a good faith comment (heck, maybe it wasn’t good faith… Maybe I should have asked) feels pretty harsh and looks super circlejerky.
Also, Capitalism =/= Markets
I guess my superfluous simile doesn’t hold water.
I don’t know if we are properly understanding each other, as I see consumerism as a push to buy happiness. If it’s just one of those things that’s inherent to capitalism, sry for wasting your time.
I’m glad you think I’m verbose, English is my second language
You and I have fundamentally different methods of thought. I’m trying to say it in ten different ways to convey my alien, to you, materialist outlook. You have been raised in an idealist Liberal world to be an idealist Liberal subject, you think naturally in idealist ways (concerned about things like “consumerism” which are not real things but second order ideas). I am more concerned with changing the base structure of society itself, and the ideas will follow.
This is the first major hurdle that Liberals will face when radicalizing and breaking out of their confined worldview. Liberals fundamentally believe that ideas form reality. That people can agree on something from an argument in the marketplace of ideas and everyone just changes.
I believe that reality forms ideas. That the underlying economic relationships that people are placed in are the base from which all justifications and rationalizations (ideology, ideas, culture, religion, etc) arise
Until we can come to terms on this fundamental underlying discrepancy between our world views there won’t be much progress. I can dabble in your world, because I was also raised partially in a Liberal idealist society - but I can also dabble in mine where you cannot follow. I know all of your Liberal precepts and notions, you know none of mine.
Again, I appreciate you talking about yourself and talking about the definitions at play. Where you’re losing me (and building some bad will) is whenever you write about what you know about me.
No questions asked, your knowledge here is vast and greatly outweighs mine. But you are alienating me. I guess it’s no skin off your back, but I always thought that I could discuss radical ideas like thought shaping matter and matter shaping thought without being shamed. Live and learn, I guess. Maybe it’s more my vice, that I didn’t propose my initial statement as a question.
I don’t want to accuse you of anything, just writing down what this type of communication brings up in me.
The point is that I “know” you because you hold the default ideology of your society, and I am intimately familiar with Liberalism in all its forms. It’s not a diss on you. It’s a statement of fact. Liberalism is the hegemonic system of belief you were raised in and what you have been espousing here.
How educated on Marxism are you? Have you read Lenin’s works? Have you read anything by Marx, even the complete Manifesto?
Why couldn’t my grandpa have been part of the communist party? Even if I didn’t know him, wouldn’t he instill it into my mother who packs it into me?
You are right to the extent that I am not read up on the literature. I mean I haven’t read the Wealth of Nations either, but dabbling with Seeing Like a State. I alsi studied sociology for a semester or two, so different social patterns are not totally alien to me.
Again, excuse me for posting without familiarizing myself with proper form, but our thread is starting to feel a bit gate keepy. I appreciate your knowledge (or what you state of it), but that seems to be the start and end of it. You’re read up, I’m not. You know me, I don’t know you.
My main guess on why you don’t want to actually interact on the topic is that you don’t want to spoon feed me everything that is oh-so-trivial on the sub. I dunno, I feel boxed in. You may be right, it’s just repelling to anyone not in the group.
You should be “gate kept” from discussing things which you have no knowledge about. Go and read Marx, at the bare minimum the manifesto, and then we can have a discussion. It’s only a handful of pages. Until then, no investigation no right to speak. Why do you believe you have the right to discuss and argue with people about things you haven’t put the bare minimum of effort into learning about? Why are you wasting our time and yours instead of simply reading?
consumerism? do you mean capitalism? why do liberals always play these word games
No, my main beef is with consumerism. Capitalism props up consumerism. I don’t have a huge problem with a market, as long as it’s supervised.
“Consumerism” isn’t an actual system. It’s just describing people consuming goods with a negative connotation. There’s nothing to critique or change about consumerism, there’s no way to attack it outside of personal blame games of saying “individuals needs to be less greedy” (idealism). Capitalism is an economic system, one well studied and implemented throughout the world. Something that controls our societies, something that could be changed via political will. You really have only stuck your toe in the water here and lecturing people who swim all day.
This would be like a medieval peasant saying “I don’t oppose Feudalism, I only oppose pilgrimage and the constant festivals”. Like ??? You are mistaking a coping tendency under certain conditions for the system setting the conditions itself.
One is an epoch spanning economic system, a thing unto itself, the other is just some small offshoot describing what some people do. Not a thing itself, just a description of personal tendencies as they arise from the conditions they exist within.
Also, Capitalism =/= Markets. Markets and trade existed before capitalism in feudal and pre-historic societies even. Markets existed under socialism as well. Please learn what capitalism is.
While I did enjoy your verbose writing, it kinda feels to be coming off a pedestal. I get that this place gets a lot of trolls, but just looking at the reactions I’m getting from a good faith comment (heck, maybe it wasn’t good faith… Maybe I should have asked) feels pretty harsh and looks super circlejerky.
I guess my superfluous simile doesn’t hold water.
I don’t know if we are properly understanding each other, as I see consumerism as a push to buy happiness. If it’s just one of those things that’s inherent to capitalism, sry for wasting your time.
I’m glad you think I’m verbose, English is my second language
You and I have fundamentally different methods of thought. I’m trying to say it in ten different ways to convey my alien, to you, materialist outlook. You have been raised in an idealist Liberal world to be an idealist Liberal subject, you think naturally in idealist ways (concerned about things like “consumerism” which are not real things but second order ideas). I am more concerned with changing the base structure of society itself, and the ideas will follow.
This is the first major hurdle that Liberals will face when radicalizing and breaking out of their confined worldview. Liberals fundamentally believe that ideas form reality. That people can agree on something from an argument in the marketplace of ideas and everyone just changes.
I believe that reality forms ideas. That the underlying economic relationships that people are placed in are the base from which all justifications and rationalizations (ideology, ideas, culture, religion, etc) arise
Until we can come to terms on this fundamental underlying discrepancy between our world views there won’t be much progress. I can dabble in your world, because I was also raised partially in a Liberal idealist society - but I can also dabble in mine where you cannot follow. I know all of your Liberal precepts and notions, you know none of mine.
Again, I appreciate you talking about yourself and talking about the definitions at play. Where you’re losing me (and building some bad will) is whenever you write about what you know about me.
No questions asked, your knowledge here is vast and greatly outweighs mine. But you are alienating me. I guess it’s no skin off your back, but I always thought that I could discuss radical ideas like thought shaping matter and matter shaping thought without being shamed. Live and learn, I guess. Maybe it’s more my vice, that I didn’t propose my initial statement as a question.
I don’t want to accuse you of anything, just writing down what this type of communication brings up in me.
The point is that I “know” you because you hold the default ideology of your society, and I am intimately familiar with Liberalism in all its forms. It’s not a diss on you. It’s a statement of fact. Liberalism is the hegemonic system of belief you were raised in and what you have been espousing here.
How educated on Marxism are you? Have you read Lenin’s works? Have you read anything by Marx, even the complete Manifesto?
Why couldn’t my grandpa have been part of the communist party? Even if I didn’t know him, wouldn’t he instill it into my mother who packs it into me?
You are right to the extent that I am not read up on the literature. I mean I haven’t read the Wealth of Nations either, but dabbling with Seeing Like a State. I alsi studied sociology for a semester or two, so different social patterns are not totally alien to me.
Again, excuse me for posting without familiarizing myself with proper form, but our thread is starting to feel a bit gate keepy. I appreciate your knowledge (or what you state of it), but that seems to be the start and end of it. You’re read up, I’m not. You know me, I don’t know you.
My main guess on why you don’t want to actually interact on the topic is that you don’t want to spoon feed me everything that is oh-so-trivial on the sub. I dunno, I feel boxed in. You may be right, it’s just repelling to anyone not in the group.
You should be “gate kept” from discussing things which you have no knowledge about. Go and read Marx, at the bare minimum the manifesto, and then we can have a discussion. It’s only a handful of pages. Until then, no investigation no right to speak. Why do you believe you have the right to discuss and argue with people about things you haven’t put the bare minimum of effort into learning about? Why are you wasting our time and yours instead of simply reading?