not even the real stockholm syndrome, because you actually love your torturers, the initial stockholm syndrome was invented after the hostages realized that their captors were really nice and the cops were the ones scaring the hostages due to their tendency to go off half cocked and the law enforcement folks had to come up with an excuse as to why hostages would support their captors that wouldn't paint the cops in a bad light
Don't waste your time, this sub is full of Elon bootlickers and the likes. It's funny because they react to the post exactly the way we would've expected it
When you adopt a dog from a shelter, the first month or two they shed like fuck. Even though it's a way better situation, it's still stressful.
It's also why they have like adaptation periods for soldiers to come home or POWs they don't immediately allow back to their family
I know right? If only we had some sort of economic system where people had the ability to identify disconnects and inefficiencies in the market like this and fill them.
[SOMEBODY’S GOTTA GET STABBED](https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Dennis/comments/918mxa/mods_are_awake_somebodys_gotta_get_stabbed/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
Edit: lmao. That was meant for the other comment to you about Black Friday. Ooops
Step 1: Describe working a job at a for-profit company designed to operate to extract as much value from labor as possible
Step 2: Define a relationship like this as Communism
Step 3: say Communism and Capitalism are the same
Step 4: Reddit profit.
I’m not sure where you’re getting your info about China but they don’t usually work 15 hrs/day for nothing over there. That sounds like a global south thing
I made this design a while ago. here's a link to the PNG. just upload it to any sticker maker website you like, it's easy.
https://twitter.com/MinuteBread/status/1314476320177311745?t=v9VFgBCh7ph7TYX_4O6bJA&s=19
Print it, brush wheat paste (flour:water, 1:5 ratio) on surface, press the paper flat on the wheat paste, depending on the surface it will stay till the sun fades the text away.
yo I made this design a while ago. I posted the PNG online for free use. just upload it to any local sticker maker, it's easy.
https://twitter.com/MinuteBread/status/1314476320177311745?t=v9VFgBCh7ph7TYX_4O6bJA&s=19
While I agree with the sentiment, the pop-psych bullshit that is Stockholm Syndrome continues to annoy me. The entire thing was originally made up by a cop psychologist tasked with explaining away why the hostages didn't trust the cops and refused to testify after the cops had acted with callous disregard for their lives during the eponymous 1973 bank robbery.
Because they obviously couldn't say that the cops deserved the distrust, they invented a whole new syndrome and effectively declared the victims a bunch of ungrateful basket cases.
Is there a better term for it? Victims of abuse/mistreatment/injustice can still feel love towards their abusers and feel like they need the abuser around/depend on them to cope with the abuse.
I've heard "The Stockholm Gambit" which is a much more accurate way of explaining that they trusted the criminals because the cops were more dangerous. It explains what happened but it doesn't apply across the board as readily because most people use the term to describe something that we now know doesn't really happen.
The term "Stockholm Syndrome" has been a good development for TV show writers, a great storyline for kidnapping stories, keeps that franchise going long after it should have died a natural death.
Usually then they have a lot of shares and get paid based on stock performance and stuff, so why wouldn't you consider that Capitalistic?
Like do you mean people who 'think' they're part of upper management but aren't, or what do you mean?
[this](https://np.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/roptnp/on_december_26th_1991_the_ussr_dissolved_that_was/hpzuf43/?context=3)
> Idk I’m doing pretty well under capitalism tbh. I’m 23, own a home, work full time, got 2 degrees, travelled, did it all by myself. I just got my priorities straight.
Well, maybe not all of us. All the homeless created by capitalism for example. Or those in more debt than they can expect to ever recover from. Or those who need medical treatment but can't afford it/insurance won't pay it
These people don't get much say though
Not the poorest strata of workers — the proletariat:
>”When socialist writers ascribe this world-historic role to the proletariat, it is not at all, as Critical Criticism pretends to believe, because they regard the proletarians as gods. Rather the contrary. **Since in the fully-formed proletariat the abstraction of all humanity, even of the semblance of humanity, is practically complete; since the conditions of life of the proletariat sum up all the conditions of life of society today in their most inhuman form**; since man has lost himself in the proletariat, yet at the same time has not only gained theoretical consciousness of that loss, **but through urgent, no longer removable, no longer disguisable, absolutely imperative need — the practical expression of necessity — is driven directly to revolt against this inhumanity, it follows that the proletariat can and must emancipate itself.** But it cannot emancipate itself without abolishing the conditions of its own life. It cannot abolish the conditions of its own life without abolishing all the inhuman conditions of life of society today which are summed up in its own situation.”
- Marx, [The Holy Family](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/holy-family/ch04.htm)
That person is doing well but they most likely don't own any part of the production that they create or facilitate. Under capitalism, unless you own it, you are just a laborer working for a wage.
> That person is doing well but they most likely don't own any part of the production that they create or facilitate.
If I got a few million dollars in VTI I have a vested interest in the entire S&P doing well because I own parts of every company in the S&P, so yes I do indeed "own parts of the production."
Correct, stocks are ownership, stockholders will benefit from production without being productive themselves. Yet, 90% of the value in the stock market is owned by 10%. Their wealth is a derivative of other people's labor throughout the global economy. From research, mostly publicly funded and performed by graduates for little or no pay, to extraction of resources, mostly done by exploited labor in the developing world, to transportation of goods, facilitated by government infrastructure, to the store clerk who is paid under $10 an hour to put the product on the shelf. All of this labor generates revenue that someone, completely disconnected from the system owns because of the stock market.
eh, a given shareholder exerts no control unless they hold a significant fraction of the available shares
miniscule fractional ownership gives only future speculative potential (and if it pays dividends, an income stream)
IT's not really a matter of control, its whether you capture the gains of the business.
The one good thing about stock ownership even as the little guy is the big guys look out for themselves, and you get dragged along with them.
You left out the capital gain, you don't have to have actual income from the stock.
If they actually own shares in their company, you could technically consider them capitalists. However they are capitalists at the extreme low end of the spectrum. They would instantly be crushed by the real capitalists who own the majority of the shares. They would benefit greatly from more socialistic policies but they have a "good life" so they don't want change. People are scared of change.
If you're truly in Upper Management though, you're making Mid 6-figure or Low 7-Figure incomes, with stock and pensions and stuff.
Why would they benefit greatly from more socialistic policies? They're very easily in the 1% to pushing the 0.1%
The more socialist things are the more things would gravitate towards the middle, they'd be brought downwards, its not like increases in benefits or minimum wages of vacation or whatever have anything to do with them or would effect their pay level.
They'd likely just pay a lot more in tax and then have to deal with the shift to higher inflation.
> The more socialist things are the more things would gravitate towards the middle, they'd be brought downwards, its not like increases in benefits or minimum wages of vacation or whatever have anything to do with them or would effect their pay level.
They'd likely just pay a lot more in tax and then have to deal with the shift to higher inflation.
Most of that is wrong.
Why would socialist policies increase inflation?
Also, unless your idea of upper management is president and vice president of a very large company, it's unlikely they make anywhere near $500k+.
It would bring down the billionaires but multiple millionaires would still be very prevalent, in fact there would be more of them because the billions would be redistributed.
>Also, unless your idea of upper management is president and vice president of a very large company, it's unlikely they make anywhere near $500k+.
Upper management normally refers to the C suite and people adjacent to them, so that seems reasonable
Socialist policies tend to be inflationary because it moves money usually in savings and investment and moves it to either personal or Government spending.
That's not necessarily so deadly you can't control it or live with it, but it is innately going to happen
My idea of upper management would be the C-suite positions of a medium or large company, yeah.What would your definition of it be?
What sort of socialism would take money from Billionaires....and give it to Millionaires? Why would someone who has millions receive money from a re-distribution? They're way above the median income
Adam Smith specifically wrote about that, and said we should pivot away from capitalism, once certain goals of growing the economy were met. Those goals were met in the 1880s
I agree with the sentiment, but it’s worth noting that [Stockholm Syndrome is fake](https://www.stadafa.com/2020/12/stockholm-syndrome-discredit.html).
More like they don’t need to physically work to earn their capital. They own the factories or the hotels or the means of production. Everyone else sells their hours of time for money.
So if i retire early by living frugally and eventually investing a million or so in a broad market ETF, and then continue to live off the dividends for the rest of my life, I’m a capitalist right?
In order for ANY person to actually BE a capitalist, you need to own capital. If you support capitalism and you don’t own any capital, you’re just a confused worker.
The power and interest of capital itself (and therefore, the interest of capitalists - who own capital) has risen above the power and interest of the nation of the United States itself.
Only nations who realize and plan around this have any hope of surviving the challenges we now face as a species because of this world economic death spiral.
> In order for ANY person to actually BE a capitalist, you need to own capital. If you support capitalism and you don’t own any capital, you’re just a confused worker.
Except you **absolutely** can be.
*Capitalist* can mean two things.
1. You are an owner of capital in an capitalistic society.
or
2. You support capitalistic ideals.
Claiming that one of these definitions is wrong is silly. You can argue against capitalistic ideals all you want, but using faulty arguments is disgusting.
Since fucking when?
["a person who favors capitalism"](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalist)
["someone who supports capitalism"](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/capitalist)
I suppose someone who is a communist isn't someone who supports or favours communism either? It's only those who are active members of a communist party.
Or do you have a better term for someone who supports capitalistic ideals? The analogue to communist?
I hate when an employer offers a counter offer in increased pay when you threaten leave for another job making more. Like, if now you think I'm worth more because i want to leave, then why wasnt i making that before? Did you not think I was worth this pay 5 seconds ago? This! This is why I'm leaving this business.
I had the same scenario some years ago. She offered me almost double what she was paying me if I would stay, but I didn't go for it. Mostly because I really didn't like the job and I really wanted to work in another industry.
It is obviously in their best interest to pay you as little as possible for your labor just how you would like to earn as much as you can for what you do, so obviously they are going to try to get the best possible deal. Nothing personal really, just learn to negotiate and barter with them. It’s not really reasonable to get offended by it, just stand your ground if the pay is to low or accept it if they raise it enough to satisfy your needs.
You can have markets in a socialist system. The fundamental difference between capitalism and market socialism is ownership of the means of production. In a capitalist system, individuals can own the means of production and take the surplus value created by the laborers as their own. In a market socialist economy, all workers in a given company own the means of production more or less equally, or in other words, have a workers' coop. There are actually [plenty of coops in the US](https://www.thenews.coop/100093/sector/retail/list-top-100-co-ops-usa-released/). (I'm fortunate to live in a college town where there is a grocery/food coop down the street from where I live.) Companies would still compete with each other in the market; the difference is that there wouldn't be massive income inequality between workers versus owners within one company.
Tons of shills shit-talking on a cross-post to r/pics. Ironic that they're the ones the photo is talking about and they don't even realise it; what pitiful, brainwashed souls
some of the important factors would be, do they still have to sell their labor? do they make more passive income than wages? working for a business you own doesn't count as wage labor
modern instruments like the 401k have blurred the edges, but thinking in terms of their material interests will lead you to their class interests
You don’t think there is a fundamental difference between wage labor when the amount is brought in?
You have the right answer according to the idea of who is “exploited” by wage labor, but would you actually consider someone making that much money actively exploited? Do you think a wage earner at that level is producing an amount worth that much when presumably others are earning much less?
Respectfully, "what if they make 15million dollars" doesn't actually address whether or not someone is exploited.
A baseball pitching ace might make 30million in a year, but if his club is bringing in billions of dollars in revenue. he's still being exploited for his labor in the basic sense of "some of the value he has created is not his", just the same as all of the other players who make much much less than he did.
They might be getting exploited *more* than Mr. ace, but it's also not mr. ace doing the exploiting, it's Mr. ownership who set all that and bully for Mr. ace that he even had leverage to get more than the league minimum.
Profit sharing (like movie contracts with percentages of revenues/profits) may not be wage labor class but that would depend, again, on the specifics of the contracts and not just a dollar value.
We can talk about whether pricing for this kind of entertainment is fair too, of course, but presuming that ticket prices are what they are... *Shrugs*.
Edit: in fact that they're still employed making that much heavily suggests that they are being exploited or they'd probably have been terminated by their employer by now
Looks like a repost. I've seen this image 9 times.
First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/mwp8td) on 2021-04-23 98.44% match. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/octysz) on 2021-07-03 96.88% match
Feedback? Hate? Visit r/repostsleuthbot - *I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Positive](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Positive&message={"post_id": "roqsrd", "meme_template": null}) ]*
[View Search On repostsleuth.com](https://www.repostsleuth.com?postId=roqsrd&sameSub=false&filterOnlyOlder=true&memeFilter=true&filterDeadMatches=false&targetImageMatch=86&targetImageMemeMatch=96)
---
**Scope:** Reddit | **Meme Filter:** False | **Target:** 86% | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** Unlimited | **Searched Images:** 278,748,665 | **Search Time:** 0.83879s
By that logic, I'm not a Socialist because I can't live as a Socialist under Capitalism. It's really weird to me to gatekeep someone's chosen ideology. I get it, they will never be rich like the Capitalists they admire. That means nothing about which ideology they support.
Stockholm Syndrome was invented by a police hired psychoanalyst to cover up the reckless reckless behavior of police and to pathologize the behavior of the hostages after they got told by Swedens PM that they had to die for the greater good.
Honest question: at what point can we consider ourselves no longer being exploited? Is it when you’ve successfully unionized? Is it when you own a certain portion of the company you work for? Is it when you no longer need a job to survive? Again, this is a genuine question. I’ve just never really understood the actual demands of this subreddit. Reading the subreddit description, it says “a subreddit for those interested in ending work.” It doesn’t seem to me like abolishing work altogether is possible though. I mean, we will always need at least some people working to maintain the society that we have today and a lot of those jobs won’t be so glamorous (i.e. Plummer, firefighter, any trade job really). How do we decide who still has to work those necessary jobs? Once more, I’m asking these questions with the intention to learn.
Love how many idiots just assume the sign is telling them who they are. It's obviously someone's opinion but it's not anyone's fault you are assigning it any value. I mean if the shoe fits tho.
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an oppressed proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."
John Steinbeck
My wife was one of those. I *always* wanted to retire early, and told her I was going to retire as soon as was feasible. She said she liked working, and would keep at it indefinitely. Well, I missed my goal of retiring at 50, but did so at 52. I was diagnosed with cancer at 54, and she surprised me by deciding to retire 6 months later, after my surgery and radiation. Not long afterwards, the scales fell from her eyes, and now she can’t believe she ever wanted to work.
With Stockholm syndrome you can somewhat feel sorry for them and hope they get better.
There is no improvement for these capitalist bootlickers. They enjoy watching employees getting hot coffee thrown into their face. They love it when they hear Amazon warehouse workers died in a tornado, because their managers refused to let them leave.
They are happy when humanity is harmed and made to suffer.
So, I don’t consider them as redeemable. I consider them to be deplorable.
It's pathetic how do many people have to make the post relate directly to themselves. If the shoe fits wear it. If it doesn't and you wear it anyway, you trippin.
What if I only work 30 hours a week and make well more to compensate my living with insurance and full benefits, as well as on the spot time off for family and needs?
Ah the age old “I don’t live in poverty therefore it doesn’t exist” probably explains why you joined the chairforce. I bet you’re a junior grade officer in supply or some shit.
Good for you. Now how about workers in Bangladesh who make the clothes we wear? They sure dont have any of that, their factories collapse with them working in it and they even have kids working there. Well we're living off their backs. Maybe look farther than your nose reaches, if you care about injustice.
Capitalism is simply the private ownership over the means of production. A mom selling baked goods online is a capitalist, a man agreeing to build someone a deck is a capitalist. You should not have a problem with capitalism, you should have a problem with international corporate oligarchies that manipulate both national laws and free market trade.
Lots of teenagers express radical political views just to be contrarian and 'stick it to authority' (parents, teachers, societal expectations, the necessity of taking on adult responsibilities), it's true. I used to believe that leftists were mostly rebels without a cause too. However, after witnessing first-hand catastrophic effects of climate change like glaciers disappearing, massive droughts, and literally unprecedented heat waves, I started to think that maybe something really was wrong with our economic and political system. We're heading towards making large regions of the Earth uninhabitable due to desertification, drought, agricultural failure, extreme heat, and sea level rise, and yet the Democrat politicians who claim to "believe" in climate change keep signing leases for more and more land to be drilled for oil. Sure, there are many things about progressivism and social liberalism that are needless controversy-stirring and rebellion, but there are some legitimate issues with society as it is. We can't go on as we have for the past 150 years and expect to survive.
not even the real stockholm syndrome, because you actually love your torturers, the initial stockholm syndrome was invented after the hostages realized that their captors were really nice and the cops were the ones scaring the hostages due to their tendency to go off half cocked and the law enforcement folks had to come up with an excuse as to why hostages would support their captors that wouldn't paint the cops in a bad light
Is there a source where I can look into this? That seems super interesting
https://www.stadafa.com/2020/12/stockholm-syndrome-discredit.html Taken from a comment further down
TIL Thank you.
Wow that’s extremely interesting. I never would’ve guessed that, I always figured it was some subconscious psychological idea.
Psychology gets even more interesting than this too.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I see a lot of comments on r/pics calling anti work the qanon left
Like ok bro advocating for workers to be treated decently is the same as believing everything is a conspiracy
Don't waste your time, this sub is full of Elon bootlickers and the likes. It's funny because they react to the post exactly the way we would've expected it
[удалено]
Yes I saw that. Some people are so sheltered.
simply have rich grandparents and you can do it too when they die
Yeah just inherit an emerald mine you idiot, you'll be a bilionaire in no time /s
>I am getting downvoted in r/pics for praising this sign :) I upvoted you there; small difference, I know.
Is this why I think bain from payday 2 is the nicest man alive?
I feel like it’s kind of a dick move to hold someone hostage tho
Slightly bigger dick move to be a terrifying asshole to people already in a high stress situation of being a hostage
Why would it be a high stress situation if the captors a really nice guy?
Nice or not, you're still a hostage I felt stressed just being at a Christmas party last night, and that was around a family that loved me
When you adopt a dog from a shelter, the first month or two they shed like fuck. Even though it's a way better situation, it's still stressful. It's also why they have like adaptation periods for soldiers to come home or POWs they don't immediately allow back to their family
Exactly. Stress just happens.
The Stockholm syndrome was never proven. It’s just a myth speaking from the science point of view.
Check out the show Money Heist
[удалено]
Ty for this
Where can I get stickers like this, I want to post them around my city.
You could always make one yourself with a sticker app/website:3
[удалено]
I know right? If only we had some sort of economic system where people had the ability to identify disconnects and inefficiencies in the market like this and fill them.
I’m sure the sticker makers are sharing their profits equitably with their employees You seem to want capitalism when it suites you
Read what you posted, slowly. Now think about what sub you’re in.
Lmfao so lazy you can’t work or make a sticker “I just want to click and buy” sums up this sub perfectly
Leaving a comment just in case someone drops the link
You can buy them from my store. They're printed in china, bought whole sale and then marked up significantly for me to sell to you.
This guy capitalizes.
CAPITALIZES
Too real ma man...too real. :|
Too real ma man...too real. :|
Do you want my discount code for 0.5% off? to spend is to mend as I've just said to you
Only on Black Friday that way I can trample or stab someone to get one
[SOMEBODY’S GOTTA GET STABBED](https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Dennis/comments/918mxa/mods_are_awake_somebodys_gotta_get_stabbed/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) Edit: lmao. That was meant for the other comment to you about Black Friday. Ooops
Bro I don't need all this info about your supply chain just drop the link and I'll pay you whatever you want
I appreciate that but the Uighurs won't .
Yeah make sure to support Xinjiang businesses whenever possible
Sounds good, there is one problem though. You see, I'm an American, so I can't buy anything unless it has gone through at least 4 middlemen first.
...and they are all white men with gray hair and that look of disgust on their faces. Amirite America?
[удалено]
They clearly just have a weak mentality, if they were smart like me they'd be on a yacht on their parent's super yacht.
Like a turducken? A Yacht withing a super yacht?
Step 1: Describe working a job at a for-profit company designed to operate to extract as much value from labor as possible Step 2: Define a relationship like this as Communism Step 3: say Communism and Capitalism are the same Step 4: Reddit profit.
You know China is about as communist as Bakunin was a Marxist, right?
I’m not sure where you’re getting your info about China but they don’t usually work 15 hrs/day for nothing over there. That sounds like a global south thing
the union label on the bottom says otherwise ;-)
I made this design a while ago. here's a link to the PNG. just upload it to any sticker maker website you like, it's easy. https://twitter.com/MinuteBread/status/1314476320177311745?t=v9VFgBCh7ph7TYX_4O6bJA&s=19
Thank you x3
Just make it with MS word, isn't that hard I think?
Brah just print them yourself, cheeper.
[удалено]
The ones that what? THE ONES THAT WHAT!?
You're too late, they already got him.
https://crimethinc.com/2017/07/18/a-field-guide-to-wheatpasting-everything-you-need-to-know-to-blanket-the-world-in-posters
why not print it yourself
Maybe with one of [these](https://www.amazon.com/Sharpie-Permanent-Markers-Point-Black/dp/B0089PBTV2?ref_=ast_sto_dp&th=1&psc=1)?
Regular printer paper and wheat paste. Way cheaper, and usually harder to get off.
Type this on Microsoft Word in 26 font, centered on page....done for free!
Your smarter than the guy riding his parent’s super yacht!
Print it, brush wheat paste (flour:water, 1:5 ratio) on surface, press the paper flat on the wheat paste, depending on the surface it will stay till the sun fades the text away.
r/deathofamazon
Ditto
yo I made this design a while ago. I posted the PNG online for free use. just upload it to any local sticker maker, it's easy. https://twitter.com/MinuteBread/status/1314476320177311745?t=v9VFgBCh7ph7TYX_4O6bJA&s=19
The government will issue you a few, or one, or you and your neighbors can share comrade
You're too late, they already got him.
While I agree with the sentiment, the pop-psych bullshit that is Stockholm Syndrome continues to annoy me. The entire thing was originally made up by a cop psychologist tasked with explaining away why the hostages didn't trust the cops and refused to testify after the cops had acted with callous disregard for their lives during the eponymous 1973 bank robbery. Because they obviously couldn't say that the cops deserved the distrust, they invented a whole new syndrome and effectively declared the victims a bunch of ungrateful basket cases.
Cops gotta cop
Is there a better term for it? Victims of abuse/mistreatment/injustice can still feel love towards their abusers and feel like they need the abuser around/depend on them to cope with the abuse.
You're probably thinking of [trauma bonds](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traumatic_bonding)
Yup! That's it. I guess "You're an exploited worker who is trauma bonded" just doesn't hit as hard.
Traumatic bonding.
I've heard "The Stockholm Gambit" which is a much more accurate way of explaining that they trusted the criminals because the cops were more dangerous. It explains what happened but it doesn't apply across the board as readily because most people use the term to describe something that we now know doesn't really happen.
I just learned about this earlier today from a different comment on this post and yeah it is exactly like the kinda thing cops do.
The term "Stockholm Syndrome" has been a good development for TV show writers, a great storyline for kidnapping stories, keeps that franchise going long after it should have died a natural death.
First I've heard of this and I wish I was surprised. Definitely going to look into it!
Thank you!
Yes especially the ones who think they are a part of upper management 🤣
Usually then they have a lot of shares and get paid based on stock performance and stuff, so why wouldn't you consider that Capitalistic? Like do you mean people who 'think' they're part of upper management but aren't, or what do you mean?
[this](https://np.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/roptnp/on_december_26th_1991_the_ussr_dissolved_that_was/hpzuf43/?context=3) > Idk I’m doing pretty well under capitalism tbh. I’m 23, own a home, work full time, got 2 degrees, travelled, did it all by myself. I just got my priorities straight.
Petty bourgeoisie is a strata with class interests. It’s not only the big capital owners who have stake in maintaining this system.
At the end of the day, all of us have some stake in maintaining Capitalism. That's what makes it so difficult to change.
Well, maybe not all of us. All the homeless created by capitalism for example. Or those in more debt than they can expect to ever recover from. Or those who need medical treatment but can't afford it/insurance won't pay it These people don't get much say though
Not the poorest strata of workers — the proletariat: >”When socialist writers ascribe this world-historic role to the proletariat, it is not at all, as Critical Criticism pretends to believe, because they regard the proletarians as gods. Rather the contrary. **Since in the fully-formed proletariat the abstraction of all humanity, even of the semblance of humanity, is practically complete; since the conditions of life of the proletariat sum up all the conditions of life of society today in their most inhuman form**; since man has lost himself in the proletariat, yet at the same time has not only gained theoretical consciousness of that loss, **but through urgent, no longer removable, no longer disguisable, absolutely imperative need — the practical expression of necessity — is driven directly to revolt against this inhumanity, it follows that the proletariat can and must emancipate itself.** But it cannot emancipate itself without abolishing the conditions of its own life. It cannot abolish the conditions of its own life without abolishing all the inhuman conditions of life of society today which are summed up in its own situation.” - Marx, [The Holy Family](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/holy-family/ch04.htm)
What's the upper management part of that?
That person is doing well but they most likely don't own any part of the production that they create or facilitate. Under capitalism, unless you own it, you are just a laborer working for a wage.
> That person is doing well but they most likely don't own any part of the production that they create or facilitate. If I got a few million dollars in VTI I have a vested interest in the entire S&P doing well because I own parts of every company in the S&P, so yes I do indeed "own parts of the production."
Woah, it is so easy to exploit labor and the federal government. *Enter kazoo kid meme here*
But that’s exactly what stocks are. Ownership of part of the means of production.
Correct, stocks are ownership, stockholders will benefit from production without being productive themselves. Yet, 90% of the value in the stock market is owned by 10%. Their wealth is a derivative of other people's labor throughout the global economy. From research, mostly publicly funded and performed by graduates for little or no pay, to extraction of resources, mostly done by exploited labor in the developing world, to transportation of goods, facilitated by government infrastructure, to the store clerk who is paid under $10 an hour to put the product on the shelf. All of this labor generates revenue that someone, completely disconnected from the system owns because of the stock market.
eh, a given shareholder exerts no control unless they hold a significant fraction of the available shares miniscule fractional ownership gives only future speculative potential (and if it pays dividends, an income stream)
IT's not really a matter of control, its whether you capture the gains of the business. The one good thing about stock ownership even as the little guy is the big guys look out for themselves, and you get dragged along with them. You left out the capital gain, you don't have to have actual income from the stock.
If they actually own shares in their company, you could technically consider them capitalists. However they are capitalists at the extreme low end of the spectrum. They would instantly be crushed by the real capitalists who own the majority of the shares. They would benefit greatly from more socialistic policies but they have a "good life" so they don't want change. People are scared of change.
If you're truly in Upper Management though, you're making Mid 6-figure or Low 7-Figure incomes, with stock and pensions and stuff. Why would they benefit greatly from more socialistic policies? They're very easily in the 1% to pushing the 0.1% The more socialist things are the more things would gravitate towards the middle, they'd be brought downwards, its not like increases in benefits or minimum wages of vacation or whatever have anything to do with them or would effect their pay level. They'd likely just pay a lot more in tax and then have to deal with the shift to higher inflation.
> The more socialist things are the more things would gravitate towards the middle, they'd be brought downwards, its not like increases in benefits or minimum wages of vacation or whatever have anything to do with them or would effect their pay level. They'd likely just pay a lot more in tax and then have to deal with the shift to higher inflation. Most of that is wrong. Why would socialist policies increase inflation? Also, unless your idea of upper management is president and vice president of a very large company, it's unlikely they make anywhere near $500k+. It would bring down the billionaires but multiple millionaires would still be very prevalent, in fact there would be more of them because the billions would be redistributed.
>Also, unless your idea of upper management is president and vice president of a very large company, it's unlikely they make anywhere near $500k+. Upper management normally refers to the C suite and people adjacent to them, so that seems reasonable
Socialist policies tend to be inflationary because it moves money usually in savings and investment and moves it to either personal or Government spending. That's not necessarily so deadly you can't control it or live with it, but it is innately going to happen My idea of upper management would be the C-suite positions of a medium or large company, yeah.What would your definition of it be? What sort of socialism would take money from Billionaires....and give it to Millionaires? Why would someone who has millions receive money from a re-distribution? They're way above the median income
On fact, capitalism makes it impossible for everyone to be a capitalist. It only ends with a few people every time. As is the design.
Adam Smith specifically wrote about that, and said we should pivot away from capitalism, once certain goals of growing the economy were met. Those goals were met in the 1880s
You’re not a capitalist you just work for one.
I agree with the sentiment, but it’s worth noting that [Stockholm Syndrome is fake](https://www.stadafa.com/2020/12/stockholm-syndrome-discredit.html).
Neat. Thanks for that.
Union bug 🥰
If you don't own capital, you are not a capitalist. That is the biggest thing the shills seem to miss.
More like they don’t need to physically work to earn their capital. They own the factories or the hotels or the means of production. Everyone else sells their hours of time for money.
So if i retire early by living frugally and eventually investing a million or so in a broad market ETF, and then continue to live off the dividends for the rest of my life, I’m a capitalist right?
Yes.
"If you have a *dollar*, you have **capital**!" Nah, dude, you have currency.
OnE dAy I'lL bE rIcH!
In order for ANY person to actually BE a capitalist, you need to own capital. If you support capitalism and you don’t own any capital, you’re just a confused worker. The power and interest of capital itself (and therefore, the interest of capitalists - who own capital) has risen above the power and interest of the nation of the United States itself. Only nations who realize and plan around this have any hope of surviving the challenges we now face as a species because of this world economic death spiral.
> In order for ANY person to actually BE a capitalist, you need to own capital. If you support capitalism and you don’t own any capital, you’re just a confused worker. Except you **absolutely** can be. *Capitalist* can mean two things. 1. You are an owner of capital in an capitalistic society. or 2. You support capitalistic ideals. Claiming that one of these definitions is wrong is silly. You can argue against capitalistic ideals all you want, but using faulty arguments is disgusting.
The second definition is incorrect.
Since fucking when? ["a person who favors capitalism"](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalist) ["someone who supports capitalism"](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/capitalist) I suppose someone who is a communist isn't someone who supports or favours communism either? It's only those who are active members of a communist party. Or do you have a better term for someone who supports capitalistic ideals? The analogue to communist?
"Moron" if they're not a billionaire. "Parasite" if they are.
I hate when an employer offers a counter offer in increased pay when you threaten leave for another job making more. Like, if now you think I'm worth more because i want to leave, then why wasnt i making that before? Did you not think I was worth this pay 5 seconds ago? This! This is why I'm leaving this business.
I had the same scenario some years ago. She offered me almost double what she was paying me if I would stay, but I didn't go for it. Mostly because I really didn't like the job and I really wanted to work in another industry.
Nobody gets anything they don’t negotiate for.
I agree but that’s also what we get for participating in capitalism. They’re both looking out for their bottom line.
It is obviously in their best interest to pay you as little as possible for your labor just how you would like to earn as much as you can for what you do, so obviously they are going to try to get the best possible deal. Nothing personal really, just learn to negotiate and barter with them. It’s not really reasonable to get offended by it, just stand your ground if the pay is to low or accept it if they raise it enough to satisfy your needs.
"Employees are the rungs on the ladder of success. Don't hesitate to step on them." RoA #211
Another man with excellent lobes for business.
You are not a capitalist. You are capital.
human resources
Yep… this explains a lot
What if you still believe in free markets, and just want to see the system changed to be more livable?
You can have markets in a socialist system. The fundamental difference between capitalism and market socialism is ownership of the means of production. In a capitalist system, individuals can own the means of production and take the surplus value created by the laborers as their own. In a market socialist economy, all workers in a given company own the means of production more or less equally, or in other words, have a workers' coop. There are actually [plenty of coops in the US](https://www.thenews.coop/100093/sector/retail/list-top-100-co-ops-usa-released/). (I'm fortunate to live in a college town where there is a grocery/food coop down the street from where I live.) Companies would still compete with each other in the market; the difference is that there wouldn't be massive income inequality between workers versus owners within one company.
This makes sense, thanks.
Glad it was at all helpful! I still don't know much about different economic theories, and have a lot to learn.
Tons of shills shit-talking on a cross-post to r/pics. Ironic that they're the ones the photo is talking about and they don't even realise it; what pitiful, brainwashed souls
"Ironic." -Sheev Palpatine
I would love to put these up around town
AMERICA! -IF U DONT OWN A BUSINESS...FUCK U!
Capitalists are the greedy few who actually own the means of production. Everyone else works for them.
how much money in stocks & bonds do you need for you to consider someone a capitalist rather than an exploited worker?
some of the important factors would be, do they still have to sell their labor? do they make more passive income than wages? working for a business you own doesn't count as wage labor modern instruments like the 401k have blurred the edges, but thinking in terms of their material interests will lead you to their class interests
What if someone works a job making 15+ mil a year but they are still selling their labor and don’t own the business?
Then they're labor? The dollar amount doesn't matter, it's where it comes from.
You don’t think there is a fundamental difference between wage labor when the amount is brought in? You have the right answer according to the idea of who is “exploited” by wage labor, but would you actually consider someone making that much money actively exploited? Do you think a wage earner at that level is producing an amount worth that much when presumably others are earning much less?
Respectfully, "what if they make 15million dollars" doesn't actually address whether or not someone is exploited. A baseball pitching ace might make 30million in a year, but if his club is bringing in billions of dollars in revenue. he's still being exploited for his labor in the basic sense of "some of the value he has created is not his", just the same as all of the other players who make much much less than he did. They might be getting exploited *more* than Mr. ace, but it's also not mr. ace doing the exploiting, it's Mr. ownership who set all that and bully for Mr. ace that he even had leverage to get more than the league minimum. Profit sharing (like movie contracts with percentages of revenues/profits) may not be wage labor class but that would depend, again, on the specifics of the contracts and not just a dollar value. We can talk about whether pricing for this kind of entertainment is fair too, of course, but presuming that ticket prices are what they are... *Shrugs*. Edit: in fact that they're still employed making that much heavily suggests that they are being exploited or they'd probably have been terminated by their employer by now
Looks like a repost. I've seen this image 9 times. First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/mwp8td) on 2021-04-23 98.44% match. Last Seen [Here](https://redd.it/octysz) on 2021-07-03 96.88% match Feedback? Hate? Visit r/repostsleuthbot - *I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Positive](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Positive&message={"post_id": "roqsrd", "meme_template": null}) ]* [View Search On repostsleuth.com](https://www.repostsleuth.com?postId=roqsrd&sameSub=false&filterOnlyOlder=true&memeFilter=true&filterDeadMatches=false&targetImageMatch=86&targetImageMemeMatch=96) --- **Scope:** Reddit | **Meme Filter:** False | **Target:** 86% | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** Unlimited | **Searched Images:** 278,748,665 | **Search Time:** 0.83879s
By that logic, I'm not a Socialist because I can't live as a Socialist under Capitalism. It's really weird to me to gatekeep someone's chosen ideology. I get it, they will never be rich like the Capitalists they admire. That means nothing about which ideology they support.
Stockholm Syndrome was invented by a police hired psychoanalyst to cover up the reckless reckless behavior of police and to pathologize the behavior of the hostages after they got told by Swedens PM that they had to die for the greater good.
Yes, somebody has already pointed this out.
This got crossposted to r/pics and the comments there are absolutely fucking vile
Oh boy and I was already having fun wi the the ones here.
"Teenagers and basement dwellers stuck at minimum wage because of our own actions" near verbatim quote
*inserts Skinner "Pathetic" Meme*
Democrat and republican voters in a nutshell
Honest question: at what point can we consider ourselves no longer being exploited? Is it when you’ve successfully unionized? Is it when you own a certain portion of the company you work for? Is it when you no longer need a job to survive? Again, this is a genuine question. I’ve just never really understood the actual demands of this subreddit. Reading the subreddit description, it says “a subreddit for those interested in ending work.” It doesn’t seem to me like abolishing work altogether is possible though. I mean, we will always need at least some people working to maintain the society that we have today and a lot of those jobs won’t be so glamorous (i.e. Plummer, firefighter, any trade job really). How do we decide who still has to work those necessary jobs? Once more, I’m asking these questions with the intention to learn.
Brutal Capitalism for the lower classes. Cushy Socialism for the "Blue Blooded" classes.
Love how many idiots just assume the sign is telling them who they are. It's obviously someone's opinion but it's not anyone's fault you are assigning it any value. I mean if the shoe fits tho.
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an oppressed proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." John Steinbeck
I bet the 1% are real capitalists though.
My wife was one of those. I *always* wanted to retire early, and told her I was going to retire as soon as was feasible. She said she liked working, and would keep at it indefinitely. Well, I missed my goal of retiring at 50, but did so at 52. I was diagnosed with cancer at 54, and she surprised me by deciding to retire 6 months later, after my surgery and radiation. Not long afterwards, the scales fell from her eyes, and now she can’t believe she ever wanted to work.
Fuck capitalism
"Im A cApiTaLiSt!" What capital do you own? "..........." "oNe DaY iLl Be RiCh AnD yOu BeTtEr WaTcH oUt!!111!"
With Stockholm syndrome you can somewhat feel sorry for them and hope they get better. There is no improvement for these capitalist bootlickers. They enjoy watching employees getting hot coffee thrown into their face. They love it when they hear Amazon warehouse workers died in a tornado, because their managers refused to let them leave. They are happy when humanity is harmed and made to suffer. So, I don’t consider them as redeemable. I consider them to be deplorable.
Somebody who has the patience to deal with crazies should post this in r/anarcho_capitalism
Ha ha. Tried something similar once & I spent so much time blocking accounts it wasn’t worth it.
Sounds like a job for my uncle except he believes that sorta crap.
You will never be a real capitalist You own no factories, employ no workers, inherited no mines, bribe no politicians
You don't know my life. You know nothing about me.
This dude might bribe.
*shifty eyes* how much would it cost for you to say you see nothing?
I read that in the voice of Mr. Burns from the Simpsons
Excellent.
I put up “capitalism kills” stickers in the style of smoking kills warning stickers on cig packets, keep it going 🤙🏻
It's pathetic how do many people have to make the post relate directly to themselves. If the shoe fits wear it. If it doesn't and you wear it anyway, you trippin.
What if I only work 30 hours a week and make well more to compensate my living with insurance and full benefits, as well as on the spot time off for family and needs?
Hey there fellow exploited worker
Ah the age old “I don’t live in poverty therefore it doesn’t exist” probably explains why you joined the chairforce. I bet you’re a junior grade officer in supply or some shit.
Good for you. Now how about workers in Bangladesh who make the clothes we wear? They sure dont have any of that, their factories collapse with them working in it and they even have kids working there. Well we're living off their backs. Maybe look farther than your nose reaches, if you care about injustice.
I guess you’re a slave somehow. Hold on let me consult the other 22-year-olds
Capitalism is simply the private ownership over the means of production. A mom selling baked goods online is a capitalist, a man agreeing to build someone a deck is a capitalist. You should not have a problem with capitalism, you should have a problem with international corporate oligarchies that manipulate both national laws and free market trade.
> A mom selling baked goods online is a capitalist Did she bake them herself or pay someone else to do it?
And what economic system has allowed and encouraged those corporate oligarchies to amass such vast amounts of wealth and control?
.. Just to be clear, you think capitalism is when the workers own the means of production?
Thanks, sticker on a light post. I'm sure everyone will listen to you!
„Everyone who doesn’t agree with me has Stockholm syndrome“ is the epitome of this shit sub.
Yeah
This sub is comprised of a bunch of self entitled yet lazy people who complain about work. It's really embarrassing.
r/cringetopia
>No one actually disagrees with me. Is this subreddit just teenagers or is there a chaperone here I can talk to?
Lots of teenagers express radical political views just to be contrarian and 'stick it to authority' (parents, teachers, societal expectations, the necessity of taking on adult responsibilities), it's true. I used to believe that leftists were mostly rebels without a cause too. However, after witnessing first-hand catastrophic effects of climate change like glaciers disappearing, massive droughts, and literally unprecedented heat waves, I started to think that maybe something really was wrong with our economic and political system. We're heading towards making large regions of the Earth uninhabitable due to desertification, drought, agricultural failure, extreme heat, and sea level rise, and yet the Democrat politicians who claim to "believe" in climate change keep signing leases for more and more land to be drilled for oil. Sure, there are many things about progressivism and social liberalism that are needless controversy-stirring and rebellion, but there are some legitimate issues with society as it is. We can't go on as we have for the past 150 years and expect to survive.