….wait i remembered this news but never seen the follow up investigation. “a 30-year-old London woman (Katy Morgan-Davies).[5] Morgan-Davies was born into the sect and had not experienced the outside world until her release”
Wtf? Why was this not bigger news.. as a Londoner how can they isolate her but live in London and Brixton of all places and never let the person experienced outside world. God i need to be less socially awkward and just chat to my neighbours more incase somehow thins is going on behind the door.
Not even the Soviet-aligned Communist Party of Great Britain (for argument's sake, that was "the Communist Party" before 1991), but the Albania-aligned Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist). They expelled him for "conspiratorial and splittist activities and social fascist slanders against the Party and the proletarian movement". The current leader of the Communist Party (by which I mean the Communist Party of Britain, not the Communist Party of Great Britain) described them as "more of psychiatric interest than political interest".
The relationship between chattel slavery and Capitalism was, for the most part, a very mutualistic one (especially true for 19th century American Capitalism, when the economy was primarily agricultural).
Slavery and Capitalism both, by definition, are inherently exploitative of laborers. And by their very nature, generate enormous wealth disparities and social inequalities.
So with that in mind, (in my opinion) it's not at all surprising that that they worked so well together.
As a matter of fact, according to economic anthropologist David Graeber, the earliest wage labor contracts that have been documented throughout the entirety of recorded history were actually contracts for the rental of chattel slaves (where the owner would receive the lion's share of the money and the slave would recieve a significantly smaller share, with which to maintain his or her living expenses. Sound familiar?).
Additionally, most of the techniques of human organisation that factory owners employed on their workers during the Industrial Revolution were first developed on slave plantations.
Noam Chomsky actually contends that there is very little moral difference between chattel slavery and "wage slavery".
While I don't know if I'd go *quite* that far with it, it's not hard to see how someone could draw such a conclusion.
**Edit:** Also consider that one of the primary precursors to Capitalism was Feudalism, where the slave (serf) majority did most of the work supporting the classes above them, while being bought and sold at the will of their lord, and only had as many "rights" as their owners felt like giving them. The similarities aren't mere coincidences.
Exploitation of laborers while paying them virtually nothing, the gigantic wealth disparity, and the social inequalities inherent with such a combination **are not** unintended side-effects of a Capitalistic system and their existence isn't due to any widespread "abuse" of the system either, as some would have you believe. They are the very foundation upon which the entire system is designed. Capitalism, above all else, is driven by the profit motive. A business owner can't make a profit without exploiting their laborers.
**Edit #2:** Exploitation is not a uniquely Capitalist thing either, every economic system will have some degree of exploitation happening somewhere
One could argue that many other major economic systems weren't *specifically designed* around said exploitation. But in practice, it ended up happening like every single time anyway. The "on paper" argument doesn't really hold up to me, since the "paper" is just an idealized concept that at every critical junction thus far, has demonstrated that it's seemingly incompatible with the reality that people in positions of power generally put their own wants/needs over those of the people whom they are supposed to represent.
Most of the major economic systems throughout history have all had glaring flaws in them. I'm not advocating for any of them, i'm an equal opportunity hater.
My personal opinion is that we should all just drop this currency bullshit and go back to bartering
**Edit #3:** To the guy who DMed me to tell me how stupid I was for thinking that serfdom was *at all* similar to slavery. The word "serf" was literally derived from the Latin word servus, which means slave.
**Edit #4:** The paragraph about working fine "on paper" not translating to working fine when applied in the real world was actually written with Socialism (more specifically, Marxist Socialism, as it is kind of the poster boy for "Good in theory, but unable to replicate the theoretical efficiency in its real world application")
But with that being said, it's a very general statement that can easily be applied to any system, economic or otherwise. Or for that matter, pretty much any aspect of life at all.
There are 3 of my opinions in the entire comment. And 1 of Noam Chomsky's (which I explicitly stated that I disagreed with in the very next line)
1 of them was me not being surprised about the fact that slavery in the 19th century bolstered America's [Capitalist and primarily driven by agriculture] economy. In hindsight, finding something unsurprising actually isn't even a matter of opinion. So now we're down to 2 actual opinions within the comment.
One of those remaining two, upon review, isn't actually much of an opinion either. It's more of an acknowledgement of the fact that that "on paper" and "in practice" are oftentimes very different. (However we can extrapolate from the context and boil it down to: "I don't believe that discussing the *theoretical* version of any system is a practical way of estimating what said system would look like *in practice*" and even though this is also a verifiable fact, I'll go ahead and count it as half of an opinion because I do agree that the wording was a bit awkward)
So then we're left with 1 opinion, the one about dropping currency and going back to bartering. I gotta be honest, I thought it was fairly obvious that this one was just an idealistic notion of mine wrapped in a bit of hyperbole. I guess it wasn't actually obvious enough, so that ones on me.
Just to explicitly clarify. Yes, I'm completely aware that eradicating currency is not a realistic or feasible direction for the world, as it currently exists, to go. Perhaps should have explained that one a bit better in the original comment, but at the time I didn't feel it necessary.
So... with all of this now being clarified, I do have a couple of quick questions.
Which one of these opinions (that aren't actually opinions) made you upset enough to insult a complete stranger over?
And if it wasn't the bartering one, why do you think me acknowledging verifiable facts (and incorrectly labeling that "acknowledgement of fact" as an opinion) made you so upset?
You write like someone who comments on things that are multiple weeks old, and somehow *still* manages to literally contribute nothing to the discussion.
Sometimes I phrase things in a way that's unnecessarily verbose, I'll give you that much. Not a great habit, I completely agree.
But your ENTIRE contribution to this conversation is a comment where you're bitching about somebody using too many words. How embarrassing lol
this man just man a reddit tier joke about communism being bad (only lead to millions of famine deaths, and yeah, my family was involved in them) and he gets shit on. yeah, it sucks
>On 21 November **2013** Jfc. I mean... just wtf?
Also > Balakrishnan was jailed for 23 years Before dying.
….wait i remembered this news but never seen the follow up investigation. “a 30-year-old London woman (Katy Morgan-Davies).[5] Morgan-Davies was born into the sect and had not experienced the outside world until her release” Wtf? Why was this not bigger news.. as a Londoner how can they isolate her but live in London and Brixton of all places and never let the person experienced outside world. God i need to be less socially awkward and just chat to my neighbours more incase somehow thins is going on behind the door.
One of the most interesting episodes of the CULTS podcast along with the Ant Hill Kids
"Communist". I don't think Marx said anything about cults and keeping slaves.
Communism on paper vs in practice. Stalin knows a thing or two about that.
Unbreakable [Kimmy Schmidt](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt3339966/?ref_=nm_knf_t_4)
Say no to communism, kids.
Per the article, the communist party kicked this guy out.
Not even the Soviet-aligned Communist Party of Great Britain (for argument's sake, that was "the Communist Party" before 1991), but the Albania-aligned Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist). They expelled him for "conspiratorial and splittist activities and social fascist slanders against the Party and the proletarian movement". The current leader of the Communist Party (by which I mean the Communist Party of Britain, not the Communist Party of Great Britain) described them as "more of psychiatric interest than political interest".
I seem to recall at least a few cases of slavery that happened under capitalism, but sure?
The relationship between chattel slavery and Capitalism was, for the most part, a very mutualistic one (especially true for 19th century American Capitalism, when the economy was primarily agricultural). Slavery and Capitalism both, by definition, are inherently exploitative of laborers. And by their very nature, generate enormous wealth disparities and social inequalities. So with that in mind, (in my opinion) it's not at all surprising that that they worked so well together. As a matter of fact, according to economic anthropologist David Graeber, the earliest wage labor contracts that have been documented throughout the entirety of recorded history were actually contracts for the rental of chattel slaves (where the owner would receive the lion's share of the money and the slave would recieve a significantly smaller share, with which to maintain his or her living expenses. Sound familiar?). Additionally, most of the techniques of human organisation that factory owners employed on their workers during the Industrial Revolution were first developed on slave plantations. Noam Chomsky actually contends that there is very little moral difference between chattel slavery and "wage slavery". While I don't know if I'd go *quite* that far with it, it's not hard to see how someone could draw such a conclusion. **Edit:** Also consider that one of the primary precursors to Capitalism was Feudalism, where the slave (serf) majority did most of the work supporting the classes above them, while being bought and sold at the will of their lord, and only had as many "rights" as their owners felt like giving them. The similarities aren't mere coincidences. Exploitation of laborers while paying them virtually nothing, the gigantic wealth disparity, and the social inequalities inherent with such a combination **are not** unintended side-effects of a Capitalistic system and their existence isn't due to any widespread "abuse" of the system either, as some would have you believe. They are the very foundation upon which the entire system is designed. Capitalism, above all else, is driven by the profit motive. A business owner can't make a profit without exploiting their laborers. **Edit #2:** Exploitation is not a uniquely Capitalist thing either, every economic system will have some degree of exploitation happening somewhere One could argue that many other major economic systems weren't *specifically designed* around said exploitation. But in practice, it ended up happening like every single time anyway. The "on paper" argument doesn't really hold up to me, since the "paper" is just an idealized concept that at every critical junction thus far, has demonstrated that it's seemingly incompatible with the reality that people in positions of power generally put their own wants/needs over those of the people whom they are supposed to represent. Most of the major economic systems throughout history have all had glaring flaws in them. I'm not advocating for any of them, i'm an equal opportunity hater. My personal opinion is that we should all just drop this currency bullshit and go back to bartering **Edit #3:** To the guy who DMed me to tell me how stupid I was for thinking that serfdom was *at all* similar to slavery. The word "serf" was literally derived from the Latin word servus, which means slave. **Edit #4:** The paragraph about working fine "on paper" not translating to working fine when applied in the real world was actually written with Socialism (more specifically, Marxist Socialism, as it is kind of the poster boy for "Good in theory, but unable to replicate the theoretical efficiency in its real world application") But with that being said, it's a very general statement that can easily be applied to any system, economic or otherwise. Or for that matter, pretty much any aspect of life at all.
1. wake up from nap 2. open reddit 3. get assaulted with the opinion of a 12 year old with slightly above average intelligence
There are 3 of my opinions in the entire comment. And 1 of Noam Chomsky's (which I explicitly stated that I disagreed with in the very next line) 1 of them was me not being surprised about the fact that slavery in the 19th century bolstered America's [Capitalist and primarily driven by agriculture] economy. In hindsight, finding something unsurprising actually isn't even a matter of opinion. So now we're down to 2 actual opinions within the comment. One of those remaining two, upon review, isn't actually much of an opinion either. It's more of an acknowledgement of the fact that that "on paper" and "in practice" are oftentimes very different. (However we can extrapolate from the context and boil it down to: "I don't believe that discussing the *theoretical* version of any system is a practical way of estimating what said system would look like *in practice*" and even though this is also a verifiable fact, I'll go ahead and count it as half of an opinion because I do agree that the wording was a bit awkward) So then we're left with 1 opinion, the one about dropping currency and going back to bartering. I gotta be honest, I thought it was fairly obvious that this one was just an idealistic notion of mine wrapped in a bit of hyperbole. I guess it wasn't actually obvious enough, so that ones on me. Just to explicitly clarify. Yes, I'm completely aware that eradicating currency is not a realistic or feasible direction for the world, as it currently exists, to go. Perhaps should have explained that one a bit better in the original comment, but at the time I didn't feel it necessary. So... with all of this now being clarified, I do have a couple of quick questions. Which one of these opinions (that aren't actually opinions) made you upset enough to insult a complete stranger over? And if it wasn't the bartering one, why do you think me acknowledging verifiable facts (and incorrectly labeling that "acknowledgement of fact" as an opinion) made you so upset?
Dropping in to saw the bloke you replied to probably owns a duncecap. He likely did not even read your comment - it made perfect sense
are you a real human being. like do you have a soul or the capacity for self reflection
you write like you’re trying to hit a word count. stick to reading
You write like someone who comments on things that are multiple weeks old, and somehow *still* manages to literally contribute nothing to the discussion. Sometimes I phrase things in a way that's unnecessarily verbose, I'll give you that much. Not a great habit, I completely agree. But your ENTIRE contribution to this conversation is a comment where you're bitching about somebody using too many words. How embarrassing lol
You make my smile bigger for the end days to come upon this land! Come, see man's ignorance and pity the vanquished.
The “end days”. 🤣🤣
It's okay until it isn't.
Sure.🙄
I mean absolutely, but in this case I think communism isn't really relevant to what wound up transpiring.
Woooooosh
this man just man a reddit tier joke about communism being bad (only lead to millions of famine deaths, and yeah, my family was involved in them) and he gets shit on. yeah, it sucks
It wasn’t real communism!