top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 58 points 11 months ago* (3 children)

(Not that I’m necessarily a fan of the heirarchical organisation of Ancient Egypt, but sharing cuz shows ur point)

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    They used slaves, so not too far off from capitalism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

    I think “technically” it wasn’t slavery, atleast as envisioned in modernity. But there was definitely coercion involved so it probably amounts to what anarchists would call slavery. So yeah not something to take inspiration from. But an easy “gotcha” for people saying without capitalism there is no progress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)

    From The Dawn of Everything- A New History of Humanity by the anarchist anthropologist and archaeologist team Graeber and David Wengrow explaining about how people began to be used as labor for Egyptian pyramid construction:

    What preceded the First Dynasty, then, was not so much a lack of sovereign power as a superfluity of it: a surfeit of tiny kingdoms and miniature courts, always with a core of blood relatives and a motley collection of henchmen, wives, servants and assorted hangers-on. Some of these courts appear to have been quite magnificent in their own way, leaving behind large tombs and the bodies of sacrificed retainers. The most spectacular, at Hierakonpolis, includes not only a male dwarf (they seem to have become a fixture of courtly society very early on), but a significant number of teenage girls, and what seem to be the remains of a private zoo: a menagerie of exotic animals including two baboons and an African elephant. These kings give every sign of making grandiose, absolute, cosmological claims; but little sign of maintaining administrative or military control over their respective territories.

    How do we get from here to the massive agrarian bureaucracy of later, dynastic times in Egypt? Part of the answer lies in a parallel process of change that archaeology also allows us to untangle, around the middle of the fourth millennium BC – we might imagine it as a kind of extended argument or debate about the responsibilities of the living to the dead. Do dead kings, like live ones, still need us to take care of them? Is this care different from the care accorded ordinary ancestors? Do ancestors get hungry? And if so, what exactly do they eat? For whatever reasons, the answer that gained traction across the Nile valley around 3500 BC was that ancestors do indeed get hungry, and what they required was something which, at that time, can only have been considered a rather exotic and perhaps luxurious form of food: leavened bread and fermented wheat beer, the pot-containers for which now start to become standard fixtures of well-appointed grave assemblages. It is no coincidence that arable wheat-farming – though long familiar in the valley and delta of the Nile – was only refined and intensified around this time, at least partly in response to the new demands of the dead.

    The two processes – agronomic and ceremonial – were mutually reinforcing, and the social effects epochal. In effect, they led to the creation of what might be considered the world’s first peasantry. As in so many parts of the world initially favoured by Neolithic populations, the periodic flooding of the Nile had at first made permanent division of lands difficult; quite likely, it was not ecological circumstances but the social requirement to provide bread and beer on ceremonial occasions that allowed such divisions to become entrenched. This was not just a matter of access to sufficient quantities of arable land, but also the means to maintain ploughs and oxen – another introduction of the late fourth millennium BC. Families who found themselves unable to command such resources had to obtain beer and loaves elsewhere, creating networks of obligation and debt. Hence important class distinctions and dependencies did, in fact, begin to emerge, as a sizeable sector of Egypt’s population found itself deprived of the means to care independently for ancestors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)

    You list Wengrow twice, accidentally leaving out David Graeber.

    Great post! I wish I could upvote DoE quotes 100 times! One of my favorite books and required reading IMHO.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    There were still classes back in the day, serfdom, slavery, guilds that had similar exploitation to wage labor. There was plenty of coercion to get labor done.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, the famous neolithic serfs.

    Jokes aside, coercion was always a thing, but naturalizing it as inevitable or even desirable stumps any kind of radical thought for a differenti way of things. The world is something we make, and we can make it differently

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago

    We can make it different, but it doesn't mean that we'll be able to abolish coercion entirely.

    If instead of commodity production we moved past it, abolished current means of coercion (money) and instead pushed for planned economy that focuses on meeting everyone's needs, there would still be a need for some pressure to fill all the needed positions to meet all the production quotas.

    It'd still be kilometers better than "get any job so capitalist extracts money from you or starve", and is radical but still coersive nonetheless.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I mean, go back and read up on The Inclosure Acts and you're going to see the real bedrock of modern capitalism.

    The relationship between aristocrats and serfs was materially different than capitalists and wage laborers. The former was more a method of formalized raiding and looting, while the later never lets labor have their hands on the goods to begin with.

    In the same vein, Guilds were - at their heart - a system of professionalizing a craft and passing that knowledge on generation to generation. The modern academic institutions simply don't do that. Academic students have to demonstrate a broad competency in academic skills, but they have very little exposure to the commercial applications of their labor until the start their careers. A guild apprentice or journeyman is already building a client network as part of their training, while a college student only cultivates these relationships extra-curricularly (via internships or fellowships outside of the classroom).

    These are radically different systems in practice, even if you can draw some vague parallels between instances of labor exploitation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Never said that the relationship was the same, only that exploitation still existed back then, though I must admit I worded my sentence poorly.

    Granted, you're painting the guild relationships as if they were merely teaching devices, while that's far from the truth and just falls to medieval ideological propaganda. In reality, they were an early form of "capitalist exploitation" for the lack of a better term in a pre-capitalistic society, it's very similar to the surplus value extraction that we see today. The master owned the tools, workshop, guild membership, etc which constituted as means of production of that time. The apprentice sold their labor power and essentially themselves thanks to the contracts in exchange for subsistence which is literally what wages are designed to do also.

    The other forms were different though, yes, but they were still exploitative. Marx didn't write "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." for no reason.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    That very much depends on when and where you look in history. Many people didn't live that way at all and still lived in large communities and built things with the only coercion being the ties of community for hundreds to thousands of years.

    Being a serf was apparently a lot less work and less miserable than you might think from pop culture. They worked for another, yes, but they also were looked after in return, and they didn't have to work the whole year. They also could just leave if they wanted to find a new place to live, which was a lot easier then than it is now. It wasn't the false choice of today where you work or starve.

    Slavery, also, depended on the culture. In some cultures slaves were typically people who were captured or traded in compensation for a killing. But rather than be forced labor, they were treated as a sort of trial family member, and once the debt was seen as paid they would often be fully adopted as part of the community.

    I recommend a book by David Graeber and David Wengrow called The Dawn of Everything, if you're interested in this sort of thing. It challenges the foundations of what we assume history was like using historical evidence, then reimagines foggy parts and builds an at least as probable image of the past in it's place.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    They (serfs) also could just leave if they wanted to find a new place to live, which was a lot easier then than it is now. It wasn’t the false choice of today where you work or starve.

    That's literally false - serfs were legally tied to their land and lord, and the only way out was if they were either let go or escaped to some town offering freedom. This obligation was hereditary too, and getting your own land/home was pretty much impossible given how ingrained in aristocrat culture owning land was, with the sale of land being a great dishonor on your lineage and family.

    Are we literally falsifying feudalism now, is that what's happening

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 11 months ago

    it's such a pity that the first humans to invent the wheel or writing didn't patent it

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Ok, capitalism bad, but are we actually pretending that feudalism isn't worse?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 11 months ago

    we also created farms and art before feudalism. feudalism is also a capitalist structured society. capitalism did not come into existence when adam smith described it, he was just discussing how feudalism gates access to the commons through access to power. capitalism has existed for 12000 years, at least, we only started calling it capitalism in the 1700s. the key features of capitalism are owners of wealth generating resources, and workers who are paid to generate wealth using these wealth generating resources. in the age of feudalism, the wealth generating resource was the land itself, and how the ownership class acquired it was through their access to violence.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Nobody is pretending that. Get real.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Can I link this post next time I run into someone saying exactly that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Does anyone think capitalism is getting anything done? Construction is pretty much non existent in the US and we have a housing crisis with no signs of it getting better. People profit more off of not producing housing, keeping it scarce. It feels like we're at the stage of artificial scarcity for profit

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    So your theory is that home builders are deliberately sitting on their hands? Are you mad?!

    I've worked adjacent to their industry, known a great many one-man contractors and a couple of big home builders. Believe it, they will build as fast as they can get permits and capital.

    The housing problem is mainly corporate ownership monopolizing homes. That can happen under any system. Look at China for the opposite extreme. They built too many homes! This requires legislation no matter the system.

    Second, our populations have exploded. America's population has increased 59% since I was born and the world population has gone from 3.7B to 8.2B. That's a lot of bodies to house!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    as fast as they can get permits and capital

    You think maybe this could be related?

    our populations have exploded

    So the labor force has also exploded

    Look at China for the opposite extreme. They built too many homes!

    You started off asking if I'm crazy but it seems you're agreeing with me? I don't know what point you're trying to make

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    The pyramids were paid for in part by a stipend of beer. I think that's a good better system.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    Imagine 5000 years in the future and archeologists state that workers today were paid in part by a stipend of pizza and coffee, based entirely off reports documenting the expenses of companies throwing pizza parties and having free coffee in break rooms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago

    This is a reasonable argument and made me pause to think about it. However the ancient Egyptians kept records on clay tablets and our paper receipts and digital data will all be gone, so no one will have a record of the pizza parties. That doesn't stop you from buying me beer if you like. :)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago

    Kind of reminds me of when people are like "If you don't believe in hell why aren't you raping and murdering people?". It says a lot about the speaker

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    So I recently learned my... Inclination to reject authority based on authority alone is related to ASD and I'm way more neurospicier than I understood (though everyone around me knew)

    But I know I can respect authority when there is reason to do so.

    Was wage-dependance created as a way to squish bugs like me who would otherwise laugh at authority for preposterous demands?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Don't get me wrong I'm all for a better system but it's not that simple.

    Like communism sounds nice, but if you don't do it on a global scale you still have the problem of other countries trying to influence elections or referendums, wars would still be started etc.

    Capitalism with a lot or guard rails seems like the most realistic option. Maybe a mix of systems could work, where people that work for a company automatically become part owner or something.

    A system where the government has full control over everything is going to lead to authoritarianism.

    Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    We can probably make some positive changes with better democratic systems. For example no 2 party system, but a combination of coalitions and ranked voting.

    I'm not an expert in any way, but just saying capitalism bad, without any real alternative isn't going to do anything.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    We have a real alternative. Check which comm yore in and the rules in the sidebar

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I knew what community this was, but what real alternative do you suggest? How is anarchy going to actually work?

    Hmm I just found this https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works

    I'll give it a read tomorrow as my kids will wake me up in 6 hours...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Okay no but see how would you play tetris on the internet with your ARM based phone without capitalism?

    Checkmate commies.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›