• RedDawn [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I think you’re confused about what capital is to begin with (in BashfulBob’s comment at least). Capital is the means of production. It’s the machinery, the tools, etc. Capitalists are called that because they own those things. Under socialism, the workers will own it (directly or via the state), but the capital still exists. You definitely cannot have industry without it.

    I was using it (and put it alongside the term in parentheses many times) as essentially- “financialization.”

    Financial capital is a thing but this is not what the person you replied to was talking about and it doesn’t make any sense to think the U.S. would need to “recapitalize” if it meant financialization. The U.S. is already a fully financialized economy. Recapitalization here refers to bringing industrial capital back.

    You mention Saudi Arabia “swimming in capital” in response to Bob saying that they are trying to build it beyond their oil industry. That’s not accurate. They’re swimming in money, money isn’t the same thing as capital.

    • SadArtemis [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I think you’re confused about what capital is to begin with (in BashfulBob’s comment at least). Capital is the means of production. It’s the machinery, the tools, etc. Capitalists are called that because they own those things. Under socialism, the workers will own it (directly or via the state), but the capital still exists. You definitely cannot have industry without it.

      Still low energy and woke up (dysfunction) but this cinched it, admittedly- I’m certain now that the confusion is on your end.

      Capital =/= the means of production (though under capitalism as a system has control of said means of production).

      Hell, the theoretical end goal of communism is to abolish capital- not just “capitalism,” but capital. And certainly it is undeniable if you think of it- the means of production existed long before “capital” ever did.

      And yes, money is capital. Whether that “capital/money” be in imaginary fiat currency, imaginary stonks, imaginary ugly digital apes, or gold and silver (which while having true value, all the same are used as a measure and form of speculation).

      Think about it. Do you really think communists seek to “abolish” the means of production? Do you think that capitalists simply arbitrarily own the means of production through some magic mumbo jumbo rather than through the mechanism of capital? I don’t know where you got the idea that capital = the means of production from, but I’m sure that it is doing far more harm than good in preventing actual understanding of the subject.

        • SadArtemis [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          31 minutes ago

          You should probably take your own advice. I’m not humoring this anymore, hopefully someone else will knock you out of it. Imagine thinking capital = the means of production. You may be communist or think you are (probably are just deeply ill informed) but this is ridiculous, you’ve internalized the neoliberal brainrot concepts over what is actually and tangibly presented within Marxist or even classical liberal analysis.