Reply #20: I think we're operating under different definitions of capitalism here. [View All]

Global company town is an astute observation.

Capitalism to me isn't "individual" ownership or "corporate" ownership. It is ownership of the fruits of dead labor (ex. what slaves produced, money stolen from widows, and the 'surplus value' collected by labor)--particularly by a class of people who protect one another to maintain power.

If you look at that "money as debt" video all over DU, you'll see that all the money that exists in the world is principle, but the money needed is principle+interest (P+I/P) what money is, is the hoarding of the means of other people to pay their debts. Capitalism is basically, in my view, abstracted slavery.

A good example of the collectivization of the means of production is the internet. It cannot be individually owned. That doesn't mean I can't individually own my computer.

I think intellectual property would actually be the least difficult to check. My wager is that people want recognition more than more stuff than others. If your designs (I do design as well, so I get it) are used as a mural, wall paper form, web design, CD design, you'd get credit from it, and if you really pushed your art form forward, you'd get accolades, public recognition, and "more stuff" as a gifts from other people (I also like gift economics). Academics cites one another all the time without a fee.

Certainly every system has to have carrots and sticks. I don't fine "greed" to be the problem, because if you look at specific problems of the communist situation, greed was never really an issue.

There would have to be sticks, but the people would decide what they should be. The fact that Norway lets its prisoners go home during the week, shows that the need for punishment is highly contextual. The biggest problem would be dealing with nationalist violence and fascism (white supremacy, homophobia, anti-semitism, anti-arab sentiment) and crimes of passion. Economic crimes and crimes of desperation (robbery for drug habits, distributing heroin and cocaine) would be greatly reduced and few would have "bleeding heart sympathy" for the perpetrators because the motivations would be different. If you have everything you need in life, you're a real asshole if you're dealing coke. Those with *disruptive* drug habits, would be given free and non-judgmental/supportive services. If they did not accept these services, they'd be sent to a mental health center for treatment. Mental illness is a reality. The goal should be to get the person healthy. Hopefully there would be less prisons, less prisoners.

*Note: I stayed in eastern Nicaragua for a bit and in a city of 35K-70K (flucuation based on routine migration for work on cruise ships) and there was only one jail "cell" (it wasn't like a cell, more like a temporary port-a-can for drunks) and one murder in 1969. Of course there was revolutionary and counterrevolutionary violence, but no murder. No theft either--despite the poverty. I was there to explain to people what cocaine was because bags were washing up on the shore and people thought it was baking powder and a bunch of kids died. Columbians were dropping coke on the shores in hopes of getting people hooked so that they'd carry packages up through Honduras and into Mexico towards the US. The "crackheads" there didn't steal. They were polite. People let them stay under their houses because they were concerned for their health. Anyway! I think criminals in such environments become gangs who seek money from the US government to form rightist paramilitary groups. In these societies it really becomes clear that once you get the sociopathic right wing freak problem under control, everything else is cake. We're the global funders of sociopathic right wing freaks.

I think most artists, writers, filmmakers and actors would kill to get to do what they love all day (except for 4) and not have to give up their dreams because they can't afford competitive equipment or have to work 3 jobs. Those who were really successful would be supported by society. Even in a country as rigid as North Korea, there are famous pop stars who are given gifts from their fans.

I don't think people are dehumanized from belonging to a larger effort, but actually humanized by it. Alone in my room, I'm no one to anyone, depersonalized. But in my political groups, people know me, they know my problems, they value me, I value them. We share, we argue, we tolerate one another. It's almost like when you're in a group you're forced to face yourself, what people think of you, and you don't get to indulge in fantasies about who you'd like to imagine yourself to be.