If more than one person is involved in it and what is being done is illegal (wether for profit or not) it is by definition a conspiracy.

people doing bad things for profit

People also do great things for profit. Capitalism is merely a tool, and it's the best economic system that we have (bar none). It's liberated people and lead to human innovation. It's evident that there is a conspiracy to make people think Capitalism is the problem, when in all actuality, it's government that is the problem.

https://youtu.be/-VaZwmV5xr0

You might like.

Capitalism is enslaving, not liberating people. What kind of liberty can you have when you are shackled in debt, one crisis away from being homeless?! Can you say anything to your boss? Can you afford to just leave your job?

According to statistics from 2015, among industrialized nations, America was notable for having the highest poverty rate, the lowest score on the UN index of ‘material well-being of children,’ the highest health care expenditures, the highest infant mortality rate, the highest prevalence of mental health problems, the highest obesity rate, the highest consumption of antidepressants per capita, the highest homicide rate, and the largest prison population per capita. By international standards, the rural counties of southern West Virginia and eastern Kentucky qualified as developing countries, as did large sections of American cities such as Detroit, Cleveland, Gary, and many others. So how exactly is Capitalism doing well? Who moved factories overseas?

Putin_Loves_Cat is a rich man royalty in hiding or something like that. He doesn't have to work like everyone else.

The US does not have Free Market Capitalism, if anything, the US is a mixture of Socialism and Fascism. There is absolutely nothing Capitalistic about the US.

We've had Central Economic Planning via the Federal Reserve since 1913. We have a plethora of Government subsidizes Social Programs. That's not Capitalism, and not a Free Market.

Your anger is directed at the wrong culprits. The real culprits to your enslavement is the government. The government has a monopoly, which then allows an environment/setting for Corporations to bribe it into existence.

All Capitalism is, is you have something I want, and I have something you want. We voluntarily trade, and go on our merry ways, having capitalized on the transaction. That's all it truly is, and the word profit is purely subjective.

You then will say: "What about your boss and company profiting off your work". Well, it's voluntary. You are willing to trade your time and skill for an agreed amount of compensation.

Hell, if I wanted to work for food instead of Federal Reserve Notes, the only thing really stopping that, is the government (ie. labor laws, regulations, etc etc). Even though I value food more than money, I cannot be paid in food. The government forces my boss to pay me in Federal Reserve Notes, then takes a bit off the top (by design).

So tell me again, how the problem is Capitalism, and not the government.

If you remove the government, mega corporations will take it's place.

How do you know? And one could say, government allowed the environment for mega corporations to exist, via laws, code, regulations, etc etc. Did you know minimum wage actually benefits mega Corporations over small businesses? Betcha you had no idea.

The wage system benefits all corporations.

That's a bit vague, and you're going to have to clarify what you mean by the "wage system", because wages benefit employees just as much as it does for employers. Forced minimum wages (by the government) hurts small businesses. Corporations love it, though, because it eliminates smaller competition from ever getting far enough into the "game".

It benefits small and big companies. Employees are the biggest loosers in the whole thing, because they work full time, yet they have to be on food stamps. Most of them work multiple jobs just to be able to survive. Some of them live in their cars because they can't afford to pay the rent. I thought Capitalism rewards hard work, but clearly that's a lie. Just ask Walmart or McDonald's employee.

Your beef is (or should be) with Central Economic Planning (ie. the Federal Reserve - Socialism) and inflation/deflation (ie. Fiat currency). This has nothing to do with Capitalism. Which is what I'm trying to explain to ya'.

How is any of that related to, let's say, Walmart wage policy? Explain it to us.

Walmart can pay 12, 13, 14, 15 dollars per hour (but "act" begrudgingly about it - all a show). Your local small grocer cannot pay those wages (even if they'd like to!), so they fire people or go out of business (eliminating Walmart's competition). That's how it works.

The only way Walmart could get away with that, is because of government intervention. Small businesses are setup to fail, and it's the government doing it. How do people not see this?

A legit government democratically functioning, would not have the same rules for small/medium business as big corporations. We need a fair market. Money has to be removed from politics for this to happen, and secret societies purged.

Friend, socialism often gets the blame for crony type capitalism. Socialism isn't even "stuff the government does", that's a very common misconception.

The FED is cronyist, profiting disproportionately from our taxes. Socialism for the super rich = crony capitalism.

Actual socialism (for the people) is a spectrum of political ideologies as well as an economic component (which also varies dramatically like the economic component capitalism).

Leninism and similar ideologies I don't like, are part of authoritarian "socialism" like fascism is part of authoritarian capitalism. But the libertarian socialism range of ideologies is completely different, it's de-centralized. This includes center left democratic socialism (Bernie was almost centrist/social democracy FDR type economics) as well as anarchism, anarcho syndicalism, etc. so it varies a lot.

Socialism isn't one ideology but many, it tends to have a higher socialism-capitalism ratio compared to the more right wing region of the spectrum. Some types replace capitalism entirely with market socialism or other alternatives.

Anyway, we can have a balanced approach, being considerate of workers, small/medium business and breaking up big corporations. No one has to suffer. But removing ALL regulations is a massive trap because we need the good ones. We need some balance between personal freedom (left wing) and economic freedom (right wing). Extreme economic freedom benefits the elites as they have too much power (they already have lots of resources, and play dirty).

Obviously the other way the elites can screw us is by extreme authoritarianism like Stalinism, Leninism, fascism, Hitler type dictatorship, etc.

Because that is literally what deregulation in the 70s did.

This is correct. The irony is the government is mostly controlled by corporations (that are influenced by power sociopath SEOs, elite central banksters and secret societies). So removing the lawful middleman, means mafia corporations screw us all with no rules/laws/regulations/enforcement to stop them. That would be a corporatocracy or corporate fascism.

https://i.imgur.com/bNz2DHP.jpg

Get money out of politics and we can either have ethical forms of capitalism (less flawed than extreme capitalism) or market socialism, a hybrid (if that's possible) or other alternatives.

Cut the strings above the puppet. Government is like a police officer, he's on your side....unless corporations/secret societies bribe him (systemic problem). Removing citizens united would be one of the first steps.

"Free market" used by reasonable people means perfectly competitive market. While brainwashed people/far right shills (Repub/Tea party/far right libertarian candidates) use a strawman: they pretend it means "no regulations".

Bad regulations like cronyist ones should be removed but removing ALL regulations is retarded, it's an establishment trap (either full retard dictatorship centralized economics or full retard corporate dictatorship). Corporations would rule with an iron fist like the laissez faire/victorian era I believe. Also like Hong Kong (low regulations). This is NEOliberalism.....EXTREME DEregulation of markets(corporations being the most dangerous) and banks (central banks probably the most dangerous).

To avoid confusion, I don't say "free market" like the shills, I mean what I say so I describe perfectly competitive market as nearly impossible theoretical nonsense but the closest would be a fair market (democrtic LAW stopping corporate scum damaging society). Fair market = only the good regulations, throw out the cronyist garbage that prevent small startups in certain fields, crony capitalist obamacare contracts (corrupt favoritism) that sort of thing.

But good regulations are things like worker rights, environment protection, safety and quality of products, ethics, etc.

Do you even know what capitalism is? Capitalism does not preclude the existence of a welfare state, or that the state isn't involved in business. The modern technocratic state was actually necessary for capitalism to survive, so that the state could subsidize the labor force for capital and guarantee money circulation back to the capitalists, and because the government was able to pump or print money to keep the system going. Had the US, or Nazi Germany, or Fascist Italy, not started printing money, there would have been no possible recovery from the Great Depression, and the massive die-off would have happened in the 1930s rather than the 2030s as it probably will (or, there would have been a socialist revolution at a really bad time for the ruling class). The government had to print reams of money again in 2009 to prevent hyperinflation, just to keep the financial system ticking - of course, the people who lost their homes or who were shunted into precarious work, don't experience any of the so-called recovery. Far from being antagonistic, government and the business class collaborate to rule together. What welfare exists is just a concession to the poor, one that is always under the threat of repeal; and the welfare that exists is structured in such a way that groups of the poor are pitted against each other, that the middle class are trained to extreme hatred of the lower class, and that the poor must live on the razor's edge of poverty thanks to asinine means-testing and reporting requirements.

Nice wall of text of nothing, which is all it is.

Do you even know what capitalism is?

Yes, now... do you?

Typical fascist "debate" tactic. You people are incapable of honest communication, and can only speak in moronic memes.

Run, coward, run.

lmfao, I'm a Fascist?

Do you have a substantive argument against me or are you going to deflect some more like the bitch we both know you are? You either don't know what capitalism or the market system is, or you're a deliberate liar, and I'm putting money on the latter. Morons like you are a dime a dozen, and too many people tolerate your ilk instead of shouting you down like the animals you are.

You're just self projecting here, and I suggest some self reflection. G'nite.

https://www.reddit.com/r/antisexuality/comments/7clpjz/resources/dps3075/

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

It's evident that there is a conspiracy to make people think Capitalism is the problem, when in all actuality, it's government that is the problem.

Capitalism is utterly reliant on government. The system couldn't function without a state mopping up the mess it creates. A dystopia where market forces dictate the reproduction of society would leave entire dimensions of life unserved; if we're to have anything like the semblance of a decent life then we need democratic control to direct resource to what society values.

I do agree that one of the problems is government. The natural functioning of capitalism tends towards the concentration of wealth among a small elite, and thus to a government dominated by those that serve this elite. Government in capitalist society usually consolidates and protects elites.

Your error is to misidentify cause and effect, believing that only if unregulated capital can take over greater swathes of society we'll become more free despite the market leaving very little untouched in recent decades, it's apparently still not enough! (This is identical to the overly-simplistic argument that some socialists sometimes come out with, that socialism would be a great system only if it were implemented in a pure way.)

Capitalism is utterly reliant on government.

No, no it's not. This right here proves to me, that the rest of what you say will be ignorant regurgitation that you've been fed by Marxist-Socialists (a system which is actually utterly reliant on a government).

....reads the rest of what you said, and yup. I was right.

If you are confident you can articulate how capitalism can prosper without government services and state apparatus, why are you avoiding discussion?

I'm not avoiding the discussion, I've just talked to too many people like yourself, who will never see/get it. It's pretty fruitless, and gets old after a while, tbh. Capitalism does not require government or a State. Capitalism is purely economics, and has nothing to do with Politics.

And I, too, have talked to many like you, which is why I find debate quick and easy. It's only fruitless if you believe you know everything and have nothing left to learn yourself.

Capitalism is purely economics, and has nothing to do with Politics. This division of social life into pure realms of 'economics' and 'politics' is an achievement of capitalism itself. What is at issue is power e.g. the power to control production, allocate resource, to hoard surplus and so on. The transfer of this power from popular control and into the hands of capitalists is the base the system rests on.

It's only fruitless if you believe you know everything and have nothing left to learn yourself.

Capitalism is pretty straight forward. It's the Marxist-Socialists who want to make it into a million different things, yet nothing at the same time. That shit is insanity.

This division of social life into pure realms of 'economics' and 'politics' is an achievement of capitalism itself.

Dafuq? How?

What is at issue is power e.g. the power to control production, allocate resource, to hoard surplus and so on.

Which the government currently controls, when you actually look deeper into it. The US is far more Socialist than Capitalist, yet, you all hate it, but blame Capitalism.

Capitalism is pretty straight forward, dude. It's the Marxist-Socialists who want to make it into a million different things, yet nothing at the same time. That shit is insanity.

The Marxist analysis of capitalism is extremely illuminating, which is why it's used by political economists the world over, even those who want to create the conditions for capitalism (Marx himself praised capitalism throughout much of his work, whilst at the same time being acutely aware of its contradictions).

Social systems, like ecosystems, are never "pretty straightforward". It isn't obvious that the economy, like systems operating across the rest of society, are ultimately sets of social relations between different social groups (capitalists-workers; government-governed; producer-consumers; and so on (much simplification here)). Understanding this helps uncover the way capitalism divides economic and the political: there are many different ways society can make decisions on what and how things are produces and distributed e.g. custom, community decision etc but under capitalism this is privatized i.e. achieved through 'free' exchange between workers and capitalists, producers and consumers. This is the economy, and in this way it is depoliticized - all power is turned into economic power. These acts might come to have regulations attached to them, which for ideological purists like you leads to accusations of socialism, but this is absurd because the economy continues to rest on contractual exchange.

Which brings us back to the OP's point - the problems which flow from this are ones borne out of capitalism. There's no conspiracy here.

Police is one example of reliance on Government. They were created to protect the new form of wage-labor capitalism that emerged in the mid- to late-19th century from the threat posed by that system’s offspring, the working class.

How are police necessary in Capitalism? Seriously, where the hell is this logic coming from? Did you know police come a knockin' if you don't pay taxes. That's Socialism.

You don't know what you talking about. You are just regurgitating talking points you heard on Fox News.

You don't know what you talking about.

Tell me where I'm wrong, here?

You are just regurgitating talking points you heard on Fox News.

I don't watch Fox news, nor do I watch TV. Been sober of it for about 10 years now.

Rush Limbaugh, maybe? Wait wait, you sound like Alex Jones.

Rush Limbaugh, maybe? Wait wait, you sound like Alex Jones.

Nope, don't listen to any of them either.

Tell me where I'm wrong, here?

Still waiting...

Are you sure it's not Alex Jones? Are you sure he didn't fleece you for a membership?

Nope. Now, are you going to address, or are you just going to tuck your tail and walk away? Because, the latter is all that you're doing right now and it's apparent (and simply pathetic). I mean, it doesn't surprise me, but... yea. Had some hope in ya'.

He's a fash troll from t_d.

How do you think contracts get enforced? Who do you think protects the wealth of those who got rich from legalized exploitation? Who listens in on those that threaten the established order? Pretty easy to see and understand that the intensified marketization of social life and production of extreme inequality has gone hand-in-hand with an intensified security and police apparatus.

Bingo! Only antidote to predatory Capitalism is organized masses and that scares the bejesus out of Capitalists. They are going out of their way to prevent workers from organizing and demanding their rights.

any system of thought which presupposes humans as nothing but materialistic economic units which can be understood exclusively in terms of production & consumption (hint- that's Marxism ever bit as much as it is Capitalism) is "the problem", if there is a single problem

Damn I hate living in a capitalist country. It sucks to be able to put food in my fridge, drink clean water, and have shelter. Man I cant stand those non-profit organizations funded by those filthy capitalists that help the less fortunate.

I'd rather starve in North Korea or Venezuela where I can illegally make more money farming video game currency then I could being a doctor in a day. Communism <3 LOVE IT

Most of the non profits you hear of actually make a ton of money. Basically if a charity advertises, the amount of money that doesn’t go into advertising and their board’s pockets is minuscule. Susan G. Komen is a great example, but sadly it’s a large percent of the big charities and non-profits. (Also for some reason my phone autocorrected komen to Jimenez, linen, and known before it accepted the word). I’m sure others can educate you more if you’re interested. Also you may want to look into the fact that the US government has never allowed a socialist country to thrive. There’s always embargo’s, or arming a drug cartel and installing a puppet government 🤷‍♀️. A communist or socialist country being allowed to actually fulfill the socialist government experiment seems to be the real “domino theory”.

You know its publicly available information what percentage of every dollar goes into charity work right? Like only 5-10 cents of every dollar goes towards charity in the Clinton Foundation. Research before blindly giving away money like the rest of the clowns. A fool and his money are soon parted.

Socialism has been tried and failed monumentally in every attempt. Human nature does not allow for its success. The best viable option is a socialist/capitalist combination seen in countries such as Norway and Denmark. Communism sounds nice but it is a dream, not reality. People crave power and wealth like a drug addict craves methamphetamine and there will always be those who take advantage of the kindness and ignorance of others for their own personal gain.

People are taught to crave power by those who have power. Same goes for money. It starts with education. Change the education and it’ll change everything.

People are not born equal. Narcissism, sociopathic tendencies, and other mental illnesses exist not to mention gaps in intelligence. People put effort into things based on incentives. It doesn't matter if it is a romantic relationship, job, friendship, etc. If someone doesn't feel they get something out of it then it isn't worth the effort.

Why would I work a dangerous and physically demanding job such as construction, armed forces, etc. when I can walk door to door and deliver mail?

Socialism is far better and more sustainable than Capitalism, but it has to be implemented correctly. Capitalism favors competition, which makes people miserable. Societies that are based on cooperation, rather than competition, fare better.

Socialism is far better and more sustainable than Capitalism, but it has to be implemented correctly.

Marx wrote Capital in 1867. It's been over 150 years and socialism has never been correctly implemented. And not for lack of trying. It just doesn't work.

Capitalism favors competition, which makes people miserable.

That's just your opinion. Some people are highly competitive.

Societies that are based on cooperation, rather than competition, fare better.

Another opinion presented as fact. Do you have any examples of societies that are based on cooperation and fare better than modern capitalist societies?

I would say, capitalism is destroying the world, not Socialism. Aside from few still remaining socialist countries, vast majority are capitalist countries. So why is the world in such miserable place? Why is there so much poverty and hunger in the world? Why is there so much hunger in United States?

A lot of things that people in the west take for granted are socialized or resulted from struggle inspired by socialist thought. Surely you don't want firefighters responding according to people's credit score?

If west didn't sabotage economically and militarily every socialist country, we would have many more socialist countries.

I would say, capitalism is destroying the world, not Socialism.

Capitalism has it's faults, but "destroying the world"? Really? Capitalism has brought about a drastic increase in quality of life all around the world. Socialism isn't destroying the world, only the countries that think it works.

Aside from few still remaining socialist countries, vast majority are capitalist countries. So why is the world in such miserable place? Why is there so much poverty and hunger in the world?

I don't even understand this. Do you think that the world was less miserable, and that there was less poverty and hunger 200 years ago? Or 500 years ago? or 1000?

Why is there so much hunger in United States?

There isn't. The government categorizes hunger in terms of "food security". Only one category, very low food security, signifies actual lack of food. In this category, normal eating patterns of one or more household members were disrupted and food intake was reduced at times during the year because they had insufficient money or other resources for food. In 2016 this was 4.9% of US households. Obviously it would be better if it were 0%, but that statistic itself is too broadly defined, and basically useless for anything other than propaganda. If one family member misses one meal in a year, that household is considered a very low food security household. Actual fatal malnutrition or starvation is very rare in the US, or any first world country for that matter. And yet a person who is actually starving to death is counted in the same category as someone who missed one meal last year.

And if you think hunger is bad in the US, how do you feel about communist countries where 100 million people starved to death in the 20th century? Of course, that isn't "true socialism" so it doesn't count, right?

A lot of things that people in the west take for granted are socialized or resulted from struggle inspired by socialist thought. Surely you don't want firefighters responding according to people's credit score?

Come on now. You know that firefighters are not an example of "socialism". Socialism is collective ownership of the means of production. And there were fire brigades long before there were socialists.

If west didn't sabotage economically and militarily every socialist country, we would have many more socialist countries.

And they would turn into authoritarian dictatorships, or collapse. Probably both.

I'm sure imperialism —a highest form of capitalism—has dramatically improved lives of people living in Africa, Asia, and South America. Why don't we ask them how great capitalism is? Your debt-supported standard of living is made possible by exploiting people and their resources. Not to mention pollution and killing of the planet for sake of profit.

Let me mention some other things socialism-inspired labour movement was able to win for you to enjoy:

End child labor

Establish the legal right of workers to form unions and collectively bargain for wages, benefits and working conditions

Establish the 8 hour work day and paid overtime

Win workers' comp benefits for workers injured on the job

Secure unemployment insurance for workers who lose their jobs

Secure a guaranteed minimum wage

Improve workplace safety and reduce on the job fatalities

Win pensions for workers

Win health care insurance for workers

Win paid sick leave, vacations, and holidays as standard benefits for most workers

Win the right for public sector workers to collectively bargain

Win passage of the Civil Right Acts and Title VII which outlaws job discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin

Win passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act

Win passage of the Family Medical Leave Act

Let's talk about hunger using numbers instead of vague %.

More than 48 million Americans lived in households that struggled to put food on the table in 2014. 1 In 5 or 16.2 million is the number of children in the United States who don’t know when their next meal will be.

100 million number is a joke, just like the "Black Book of Communism" it was taken from. Author of that book was pulling the numbers out of his a**.

How many people capitalism killed and is killing every year? Every year 20.000,000 million people die from easily preventable causes. So every 5 years capitalism kills 100 million, not because of lack of resources but because it's not profitable. That's not counting all the imperial wars.

I'm sure imperialism —a highest form of capitalism—has dramatically improved lives of people living in Africa, Asia, and South America. Why don't we ask them how great capitalism is? Your debt-supported standard of living is made possible by exploiting people and their resources. Not to mention pollution and killing of the planet for sake of profit.

The Soviet Union was pretty fucking imperialist. After the communist revolution, Russia took over every country on it's borders and supported uprisings and overthrow of governments all over the world. And pollution has nothing to do with capitalism. That's just a ridiculous assertion. Producing energy and goods causes pollution, no matter what economic system a country operates under.

Let me mention some other things socialism-inspired labour movement was able to win for you to enjoy:

None of this is socialism. Socialism is the collectivization of the means of production.

Let's talk about hunger using numbers instead of vague %.

Percentage is a number. It's not vague at all.

More than 48 million Americans lived in households that struggled to put food on the table in 2014. 1 In 5 or 16.2 million is the number of children in the United States who don’t know when their next meal will be.

As I stated in my previous comment, 4.9% of US households were categorized as "very low food security" households. This is the only category where anyone actually went hungry. You criticized me for using "vague" percentages, then you post "struggled to put food on the table". That's pretty fucking vague, my friend.

100 million number is a joke, just like the "Black Book of Communism" it was taken from. Author of that book was pulling the numbers out of his a**.

Even the most communist friendly estimates put the number at 30+ million.

Every year 20.000,000 million people die from easily preventable causes.

So I looked that up, and none of this shit is because of capitalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preventable_causes_of_death#Worldwide

Amazing, Soviet Union and imperialism in the same sentence. Was Soviet Union a Socialist or Communist country?

The Soviet Union was certainly not a communist society, even by their own admission. Communism, by definition, precludes the existence of a state.

Socialism requires that the means of production be held by the workers. There was never Democratic control of the means of production in Soviet Union, so it wasn't socialist either.

I said labour struggle was inspired by Socialism and it's principles, which led to better wages and working condition everyone enjoys. Workers had to fight Capitalist class for the most basic rights.

Are you seriously going to quote Wikipedia as source of reference? It's a known fact that conservative think tanks are rewriting Wikipedia to fit Capitalist narrative.

Let's breakdown the 20,000,000 figure:

• 9 million people die of hunger and hunger-related diseases every year. (https://www.mercycorps.org/articles/quick-facts-what-you-need-know-about-global-hunger)

• 1 million people die from malaria each year. (https://www.unicef.org/search/search.php?querystring_en=Malaria+statistics&amp;hits=&amp;type=&amp;navigation=&amp;Go.x=0&amp;Go.y=0)

• 9 million people die every year from hunger and malnutrition (https://www.enoughmovement.com)

• 3 million people die from curable disease (http://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/global-immunization/diseases-and-vaccines-world-view)

So when you add the numbers, it's actually more than 20. I have to post separate reply just for imperialism death count.

Food that you are putting in the feidge is full of chemicals, pesticides, and GMO. You don't even have the right to know which food has GMO ingredients. Clean water is hardly clean, just ask people living in Flint. Water polluted with lead is hardly a Flint-only case.

Forget NK or Venezuela, hunger is a major problem in US. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/492062/

Just because your country is very corrupt and can't afford/don't care enough to take care of their own citizens doesn't mean mine is to.

If you are concerned about chemicals, pesticides, GMO's feel free to do some research but if you complain and go to McDonalds the next day then you have nothing to whine about (not necessarily saying you do but plenty bitch and don't bother doing anything about it). Lots of products advertise non-GMO, small local farmers and farmers often don't use hormones on their animals and will readily tell you what kind of pesticides they use on their crops.

I was talking about US only. It's the leader of capitalist countries, and what happens here would eventually come to your country too. Eventually all capitalist countries will be like USA, because the system is flawed.

I don't eat in McDonald's. Small farms are different, and if I could, I would only buy from them. I was talking about big corporations and industrial-level farming.

Pure socialism isn't any better. There must be an equilibrium reached.

Not so much capitalism. Capitalism isn’t inherently bad. But crony capitalism in which government protects the interests of certain corporations and gives corporations certain rights that we don’t get.

Marx's point wasn't that capitalists were mean and evil people and that if capitalists were nice the system would work. Marx was exposing the contradictions of capitalism, in the framework of the classical political economy models of Smith, Ricardo, etc. The solution of the ruling class was to develop an ideological version of economics, and essentially start worshipping the market as a deity rather than as something connected to reality.

That capitalism is a fucked system does not rule out, however, that the ruling class wouldn't do bad things for their own reasons, or that capitalists would collude in an unfree market. Marx was specifically looking at capitalism in its supposed ideal state, and the contradictions he exposed were inherent to that system such that an "ideal" capitalism was a logical impossibility. It is far more likely - and indeed it was true even in Marx's time - that capitalism would give way to monopolies and state capitalism, in which case looking at a free market is not particularly relevant, and we're back to lords ruling over wage-serfs and keeping an essentially enslaved population (or worse, actual slaves). Although capitalism guarantees that participants must look to profit and thus capitalism needs to be abolished for freedom, the people who do rule over us would do so under form of political economy and do so for reasons that transcend the logic of capital. That's my take from experience, anyway; I'm not the best expert in Marxism, but I did read through Capital unlike a lot of people (and I think everyone should read Capital, as it is particularly relevant in 21st century capitalism, and it surprised me just how well Marx saw things coming from his vantage point).

Thank you very much for that synopsis.

What is your take on what kind of system would work or that we should try?

People who quote Marx are often Communist, but I don't want to assume that will be your answer

I’m repeating the top comment to hammer home that a conspiracy is by definition more than one person getting together to plot to do illegal things.

This explains so much of what the media is doing with regards to sensationalizing and adding political spin to their reporting. If only more people on this subreddit would realize it's just a ploy to draw more advertisable audience.

it's just a ploy to draw more advertisable audience.

If that were the case, Operation Mockingbird wouldn't be a thing.

Unfortunately, the media and the CIA work together to weave a false reality which extends far beyond mere marketing.

This is fucking stupid. Nearly all conspiracies come from government agencies looking to secure their power. Capitalism is the absence of government for private ownership of the means of production. Therefore the more the government gets involved the less capitalistic the economy is, or the less free market it is. The problem is the government (the one institution that has monopoly on force and can do anything to you against your will), not capitalism. What was the last time Walmart tried to steal your guns, or invade a country to get it's oil? Now of course, corrupt corporations DO exist. But ask yourself why. The answer is always because they are in bed with the government, giving them an advantage over the competition, destroying the nature of capitalism. If capitalism is simply people being able to privately own things, and privately sell them, then anything else than that would require more government power to intrude on the market, and if you are a /r/conspiracy regular and still think trusting the government to fuck over ordinary people is a smart thing to do, than you are a fool. The solution is not forcing a huge tyrannical communist government akin to the USSR, at that point there is pretty much no conspiracy because the government is already living in their own small version of 1984.

The conspiracy is making us think this is the only way and we can’t change a broken, unbalanced system. Humanity is a drug addict in denial.

Paging u/williamsates

Would be nice for u to join the discussion here considering our recent debate, plus some users here are also mentioning similar points I've made before

If you remove the government, mega corporations will take it's place.

If you are confident you can articulate how capitalism can prosper without government services and state apparatus, why are you avoiding discussion?

Police is one example of reliance on Government. They were created to protect the new form of wage-labor capitalism that emerged in the mid- to late-19th century from the threat posed by that system’s offspring, the working class.

It's only fruitless if you believe you know everything and have nothing left to learn yourself.

Capitalism is pretty straight forward. It's the Marxist-Socialists who want to make it into a million different things, yet nothing at the same time. That shit is insanity.

This division of social life into pure realms of 'economics' and 'politics' is an achievement of capitalism itself.

Dafuq? How?

What is at issue is power e.g. the power to control production, allocate resource, to hoard surplus and so on.

Which the government currently controls, when you actually look deeper into it. The US is far more Socialist than Capitalist, yet, you all hate it, but blame Capitalism.

Do you even know what capitalism is? Capitalism does not preclude the existence of a welfare state, or that the state isn't involved in business. The modern technocratic state was actually necessary for capitalism to survive, so that the state could subsidize the labor force for capital and guarantee money circulation back to the capitalists, and because the government was able to pump or print money to keep the system going. Had the US, or Nazi Germany, or Fascist Italy, not started printing money, there would have been no possible recovery from the Great Depression, and the massive die-off would have happened in the 1930s rather than the 2030s as it probably will (or, there would have been a socialist revolution at a really bad time for the ruling class). The government had to print reams of money again in 2009 to prevent hyperinflation, just to keep the financial system ticking - of course, the people who lost their homes or who were shunted into precarious work, don't experience any of the so-called recovery. Far from being antagonistic, government and the business class collaborate to rule together. What welfare exists is just a concession to the poor, one that is always under the threat of repeal; and the welfare that exists is structured in such a way that groups of the poor are pitted against each other, that the middle class are trained to extreme hatred of the lower class, and that the poor must live on the razor's edge of poverty thanks to asinine means-testing and reporting requirements.