80
Why do so many defend capitalism?
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2026
80 points (90.0% liked)
Asklemmy
55830 readers
455 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
Because they benefit from it?
This is only part of it because the vast majority of people do not benefit from capitalism. Not anymore at least. Of those in the working class who defend capitalism I would say most are victim to the constant stream of propaganda that the media pumps out at the behest of the capital owning class. It's something that starts from birth in most western nations and permeates into the narratives people are taught in school in a way that requires deliberate and consistent work to unlearn and break away from.
this. i remember a few years ago i was somewhere that folks had put on the macy's t-day parade. it was the first time i'd really noticed the intensity of the propaganda. most of the themes and music were just about acquiring material things and how good and normal that is. the propaganda was so strong it made me viscerally uncomfortable to watch.
I dont want to interrupt but im still waiting on my money from the election in Berlin. We were promised a bonus if you win.
What do they have to do with that?
Even more benefit from a social market economy, which might be an optimal sweet spot if done right.
Capitalism with a larger social safety net is still capitalism, and it relies on the exploitation of workers in the Global South to function. As the Global North’s capacity to imperialize the Globe South deteriorates, so too does its ability to bribe its own workers at home with treats.
That's why I wrote "if done right".
A truly social market economy also has to make sure that workers along the whole supply chain have to get similar rights and treatment as local workers.
Besides that, centrally planned economies (being the opposite to plain free market capitalism), also don't really shy away from exploiting the resources of poorer countries.
(Looking e.g. at imperialistic China here).
China isn’t exploiting anyone. You really need to start questioning what your own empire accuses its enemies of. Previously:
Total Imports 2025 EU / China:
Mineral fuels, oils, distillation products $467.75B / $442.95B
Plastics $68.38B / $56.48B
Pearls, precious stones, metals, coins $56.12B / $118.02B
Articles of apparel, knit or crocheted $53.13B / $3.74B
Articles of apparel, not knit or crocheted $48.56B / $5.79B
Iron and steel $44.08B / $30.86B
Edible fruits, nuts, peel of citrus fruit, melons $31.17B / $20.69B
Fish, crustaceans, molluscs, aquatics invertebrates $29.23B / $19.93B
Rubbers $26.46B / $20.57B
Footwear, gaiters and the like $26.30B / $5.70B
Copper $18.63B / $74.63B
Oil seed, oleagic fruits, grain, seed, fruits $18.63B / $57.02B
Pulp of wood, fibrous cellulosic material, waste $11.87B / $21.98B
So, looking at the absolute numbers, China is eploiting the world's resources in a similar fashion as the old style European Union, so I have to disagree.
I won't comment on the content of your provided reports and youtube videos (of which at least two look a little... juicy... at first glance), as me just providing you with a bunch of counter-reports and videos, whose reliability you would question in a similar way as I am questioning yours, won't change anything.
Country X importing from country Y doesn’t magically equate to country X exploiting country Y. Exploitation is a matter of unequal exchange, and not every exchange is unequal. Exchanges coerced through classical imperialism or through neoliberal debt trap peonage are unequal.
Looking at the top 3 exports of China (by a wide margin before anything else):
Electrical, electronic equipment $1016.58B
Machinery, nuclear reactors, boilers $603.82B
Vehicles other than railway, tramway $248.31B
That's all high price stuff.
Combined with its huge trade surplus, this is a classical "Buy cheap resources - sell expensive highly processed commodities back" scheme, the same as e.g. the uprising European industrializing nations employed as a strategy during their colony exploiting times (and to some degree still do in a similar fashion as China).
No, there is nothing equal here.
Somehow you’re still ignoring how those Euro-American exchanges occurred under duress, at the point of a gun.
Buying raw materials at a freely-agreed upon price, and then applying labor to them to create a finished good, is not exploitation. No one was coerced into anything.
Where are China’s guns? In China. The US has over 800 overseas military installations, while China has one, an anti-piracy port in Djibouti.
But that free international market argument applies to all (well, most of all...) countries, which is exactly my point. Modern China is as exploitative as any other highly developed modern country, independent of economic system.
Sure, as long as you insist on misdefining exploitation in that way, then by your self-serving definition, modern China is just as exploitative as the imperial core.
That’s the definition the imperial core wants to promote, because if they can’t look good, they can at least claim that their enemy is just as bad. But the majority of the world isn’t buying the hogwash that the always the same map minority is pushing.
No arguments there
EDIT: I mean "can't argue with that". Just incase what I wrote originally didn't make sense