Message from @Jones Malone
Discord ID: 376168586928193538
Which should be fought against. And local thugs are a lot easier to fight against than the federal government
Without the safe guards of a central government what prevents the wealthy from monopolizing force
Recreational McNukes
Feudalism lacked alot of these safe guards, and as a result the peasantry were directly under the whims of the local wealthy such as nobles.
"We need some manpower for this war. Get the fuck off your farm and come with us. Or we kill you and seize your assets"
Without a strong central government, who will build the gas chambers?
Jones, the wealthy already monopolize force
If we eliminate the government (or most of its power) then that disappears. If it comes back in some other form then we should fight that, also
I dont understand how it disappears
Factory owners can't force government to take land from farmers
Yes. They just do it themselves
Slum lords can't block building permits
Right, they just buy the land up outright
That happens much less often , and I agree, it shouldn't happen either, but government does it far more
Thats because we live in a neo capitalist society where our governments often adhere to the whims of the wealthy
The greatest goal of the wealthy is to retain capital and prevent us peasants from aquiring it
We have crony capitalism. Government interferes constantly. America was wealthier and there was far less poverty before the welfare state
Jones, you shouldn't think of yourself as a peasant. You should look at how wealthy people acquired their money and do it yourself
9 out of 10 millionaires in America are self made, meaning they didn't inherit it
We had far more pure capitalism a century ago, and it was pretty bad
The owner of the corp I currently work for, aquired his capital and started his business by splicing into the local infastructure of the existing telecom companies. An act like that today would put me away for a very long time
So what he did was not only illegal but unethical
A trend you see often by those with wealth in this system
And purely capitalist systems as a whole
We don't live in a purely capitalist audience
System *
I didn't say we did. I'm saying that this has happened in more pure capitalist socieities as well
In the late 19th century, business owners often would relocate their employees to towns they built paying them in vouchers only valid in these workers towns
Child labor, unsafe working conditions, no protections
As opposed to what
As opposed to these workers having some level of freedom and self determination.
They have the freedom to work there or not to
Or to start their own factory
With what capital
Capital is created
When you're just a few paychecks away from starving, starting your own factory is not even remotely an option
You can't simply create the wealth or funds required to build capital
So you can work for someone else or be self employed and save up money to start your own business
This was what the majority of business owners did. The alternative was to be self sufficient and live in what was objectively poverty, living off the land
It was legal rulings and governments mandates that at the time were considered socialistic that put an end to such practices
So, you can live off the land, or work for someone else & work your way up. How is that bad?