Capitalism, Socialism & Communism

These words mean so many things to so many different people. To me they refer to who owns the means of production. So capitalism is the individual, socialism is the state and communism is owned by everyone. But I don't think this is how most people see these words.

I just read an article where they were talking about the unraveling of capitalism because the loss of human labor due to automation. I thought to myself, what does the loss of human labor have to do with who owns the means of production? The article went on to basically talk about how as jobs are lost to automation, the displaced workers, which will obviously be poor right, will number more and more, while those who own the machinery for the automated production of goods will get richer and richer. I don't really want to discuss the economics themselves in this line of thought. But the idea is, since the gap and numbers of poor to rich will so expand that it will result in a revolution against the rich to end the dominant capitalist economic system. From what I take from the article is their idea of capitalism is one individual or group profiting from the labor of another. However all three words can very well involve a person or group profiting from the labor of another. Really socialism depends on it, and likely the communism will result in some profiting form someone else's labor as well. So really the article comes down to and idea that automation is limiting an individuals ability, or more correctly opportunity, to profit from their own labor. Again I don't want to discuss the validity of that idea, more questioning the public understanding of capitalism, socialism and communism.

I don't have a article I recently read about how people see socialism or communism, but I think for a lot of people, the two are generally seen as one in the same. Which is the state redistributes wealth to a varying degree. I think typically socialism is the lesser of the two with socialism being the state providing health care, schooling, minimum income levels, housing, etc. with the state taxing the citizenry accordingly to make sure everyone has these minimum standards that people think everyone needs, while communism is the more authoritarian version where all goods and services, whether acquired or provided, are managed my the state.

Going back to how people see capitalism, its also typically seen as a state managed sort of thing. Where business use the state to protect or enhance profit margins, usually by exploiting or protecting predatory practices against its employees and customers.

Unfortunately the common thread in how people see these terms is the idea of state control. Which is really the unfortunate realization for me. People typically have such a belief in this idea of the state, there is no other choice. The state will always dictate economics and our opportunities in life.

Now I have no idea where I'm going with this. Well I think the take away is these words, capitalism, socialism and communism are pointless. The libertarian left and right like to stake claim the left and right sides, but if the other side doesn't accept your definition, the argument becomes pointless. And then the reality to find, is that the belief in the state by the the vast majority around this world, and most states having some sort of democratic process, you have most people believing that their influence on the state through their vote is going to provide some level of freedom for themselves or other, but in reality just legitimizes more control over everyone's lives by the state. The state that only functions through violence. Which results then in a world populace acting in violence against their neighbors, without understanding the results of their actions. Which further's the negative aspects people see with their own ideas of capitalist, socialist and communist policies being enacted or redacted. Which then results in more laws and in turn more threats of violence to control people. It is a misunderstanding that creates a cycle of violence and the loss of freedom, when the reality is, most those people voting, are voting to get more freedom.

To ramble further, I think where this train of thought is leading me, is a need to change the discussion. It is not a discussion of what economic system is best, but ideas of the state, since it is the common thread through all the debate. What is the state, what is authority, how the state functions through violence(at least as it does currently and historically). Understanding the reality of voting and its consequences, as well as the responsibility each voter has morally for the violent potential in what the vote for or against. But then this presents a further problem. A problem of faith and belief. The ideas of the state, government and nations are held religiously as people hold their belief in Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, New Age, aliens, conspiracy theory, flat earth, nobiro, veganism, music scenes, racial purity, ect. People believe with everything they are and hold ideas of self worth and pride in those beliefs. Breaking the populace of those beliefs will be just has hard as convincing a Christian or Muslim there is no God. Or a flat earther the planet is round. Or a conspiracy theorist that the illuminati isn't running the world with a plan to liquidate the populace for the elite. But then the majority of people see out right slavery as wrong now and unjustifiable, where just a few hundred years ago, it was believed necessary and the right thing to do, both for the slavers and the slaves. And bringing it back to technology as a hope for wealth and freedom, rather then a cause of poverty. Look at how the internet allows individuals, with very low startup costs, can allow persons to provide goods and services to the broadest of market places. See how Steemit is allowing people to earn by just posting their ramblings like I am here. Furthermore, look how Steemit has provided a new economic model to world that is, at least so for, appears to have real potential. I mean just look how this works out for people in poorer counties. For me, I might get a dollar or two for this post, its not really anything to my economic well being living in the US. But there are places out there where people live off of tens of dollars a month. So they can literally change their lives if their only somewhat successful here on steemit. Ah, then brings us back to the state. If people earning on the internet, with dollars or even more so with crypo currences, people are not going to bother with all the bull shit tax nonsense and getting business licenses and all the reporting and paper work your supposed to do. Which is whittling away at the states influence over business and peoples lives, at least economically. When then may spur the discussion in the future, what do we need the state for and how fucked up the stuff the state does is really.

Thanks for reading if you made it this far. Please comment on what you think, tell me how I'm full of shit, or how you agree.

Brian