Eh, feudalism too. And real-world communism. And pretty much any society that ever existed on this pale blue dot in space. There are always some in power that live in wealth, and then the rest that live in poverty and get fucked, it’s not a feature specifically of capitalism.
Oh ok, I guess nothing is good then and no one should even try to make alternatives. Cool
That’s not really accurate, if workers collectively own the Means of Production and thus can direct where the production goes, they are not simply “fucked.” Alienation from labor is minimized, because instead of a Capitalist owning all of the profits, the Workers can democratically participate in the system and collectively allocate the benefits of production.
This meme is necessarily depicting Capitalism. Even within Feudalism, Serfs still owned their own tools and as such they could produce for themselves while giving a large portion to the noble lords, unlike Capitalism where all of the goods are given to the Capitalist and a petty share of the profits are returned.
Yeah, thankfully I said real-world communism. Utopian communism would indeed be great.
In feudal society, the noble owns the serfs. The serf cannot move without the noble’s consent and is tied to the land in such a manner that, if the noble decides to sell the land, the serf on the land are sold too. They have to work the lands of the noble before their own and have to pay a tax on what they own to the noble. While they own some small tools, like pots, needles, tools for churning butter and other small farming tools, the biggest tools were often owned by the village as they were too expensive for the single farmer. Some other tools were instead illegal to own, a famous example was the grinding stone, which was illegal to own, since you HAD to go to the noble’s mill to transform your wheat into flour and then bread. This was because you then had to pay a tax to the miller and a tax to the noble in order to mill your wheat.
So, in essence, in feudalism a serf did not own their land, did not own their labor and was not even free to move. So much better, right? /s
That isn’t “real world” Communism, though. Socialist States tended to place a much higher emphasis on welfare than Capitalist states, that’s historical fact, regardless of how effective or not they are/were.
Secondly, I never said Feudalism was better. I indicated the key production distinctions between Capitalism and Feudalism, in Feudalism the serf gives the lord a flat portion of that which they create, in Capitalism the proletarian receives flat wages as a petty portion of profits. Feudalism therefore has very different mechanisms, and while horrible, is different from Capitalism.
Regardless, that has nothing to do with the comic OP posted. Are there, in real-world communist/feudal societies, people that get more on the shoulders of other people’s work? If the answer is yes, then the comic does not specifically represent a capitalist society.
Because this is what the comic represents. It does not represent the welfare system, or lack thereof. It does not show any means of production. It just shows some person getting wealth on the shoulders of another person’s work. That’s it.
Then all that matters is that OP thinks it’s fitting for Capitalism, and should therefore be taken in that context.
Ok, then you are equally ok with this, I guess:
It would be stupid, but we could evaluate it within that context, without having to bring in other systems like Capitalism or Feudalism.
Communism would be the person pulling up the other person before picking the fruit.
