this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2025
409 points (99.3% liked)
Flippanarchy
1632 readers
437 users here now
Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.
Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.
This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.
Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Rules
-
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
-
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
-
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
-
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
-
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
-
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
-
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well, yeah? Capitalism is an economic system, i.e., it's concerned with making money. The social good should come from the government taxing that money. Problem being, the rich have now bought the government and our social/communication systems.
Taxing incomes only put the burden back on the working people. Rich will always find loopholes to avoid tax. Whether through subsidies or off shore companies.
If we have to stay within the system, we should be implementing wealth tax instead of incomen tax. But it still leaves the option of foreign citizenship and they just owning stuff in a country without wealth tax
Nope, the question an economic system attempts to answer is "who should control the wealth created by the working class's surplus labor;" it's concerned not with making money, but with allocating it where it should be allocated. Capitalism's answer to that question is "rich private citizens," so it ends up concerned primarily with making money, but that's an emergent property of capitalism rather than the fundamental nature of an economic system.
How is it going in the mental model of the 1950s?
The decade of unprecedented prosperity in America? When capitalism was going full blast, with the workers in unions to keep the owners in check? When the rich were heavily taxed? Sounds just fucking great to me.
Yeah... and hou sustainable did it turn out to be?
We dropped the unions and taxation of the rich. No reason that could not have continued. No reason we can't do it again.
That only works for so long, because the system isn't stable that way. Capitalism requires some sort of exploitation. If that exploitation is hindered for too long, capitalism will become in crisis.
This chapter explains why that deal didn't continue in Europe
Also: if you tax the rich too much, they will conduct a capital strike, where they stdpinvesting in the country, or move their business somewhere else. That bit isn't just a bogeyman from conservatives. It has some merit. Social democracy just isn't a stable system.