Capitalism and the Video Game Industry

Post Reply New Topic

Sure . . . and will that be cash or credit?

Okay enough of that. The capitalists are shortsighted and corrupt. At least workers know the factories, warehouses, kitchens, and farms like the backs of their hands. They work hard and deserve better.

Maybe you should go back to reading your Ayn Rand novels since you love capitalists so much.

That's it! From now on I'm only playing video games made by socialist countries! What follows is a list of video games I will be playing.

• Tetris

End of list

Ironically capitalism is the only system that allows the workers to own the means of production. No king or dictator ever allowed the workers control over that.

Lol.Great point although the Marxists would prolly argue that the workers collectively own the means of production through their government.There has never been a true communist country just like there has never been a true capitalist country in the history of the world.Even America is not 100 percent free market obviously.Before capitalism came along the vast majority like 90 to 99 percent of the population was in third world poverty living on 1 to 2 dollars a day so capitalism has made a lot of the world not just America richer and have a much higher quality of life because it would still be like the third world if the Industrial Revolution never happened.Also another thing to think about is that even min wage workers at Walmart have a much higher standard of living than the elites like royalty and nobility of many centuries ago.

There is one critical point you are overlooking: The Capitalists OWN the factories, warehouses, kitchens, and farms.  What do the workers own?  Not hella much, which is why they rarely ever organize and offer to buy the means of production from the current owners.  If they did, then they could divert all the profits into their own pockets.

But no . . . it is much more fun to complain about a system which they cannot control, yet which they cannot live without, either.

Sucks to be them, I guess.

Sure!  All they gotta do is pool their individual resources and either make an offer to buy a business that is currently owned by a Capitalist, or use their pooled resources to start up a competing business of their own.

Collectively own the means of production through the government sounds like another way of saying the government owns the means of production. Government would own the land too. How many people in the USSR owned their own house?

The socialists like to villify landlords and say under socialism there will be no landlords. Yet in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics they had this guy as their landlord.

 

 

 

 

Don't forget "Worker's and Resources - Soviet Republic" though it wouldn't be classified as made in a socialist country given that the game was made after Czechoslovakia went bye bye, the Slovak game company technically resides in a country that was ex-socialist so.

Aww, good old Tito is the "landlord" of the Yugoslavs. At least he feeds his people with Brotherhood and Unity unlike the rest in the pics.

Blame the Russians for putting a Georgian and letting him use them as their toys for his emotions.

But there is always someone to use them and abuse them. If it's not a Georgian it will be someone else. They got rid od the tsar and they got another tsar.

What are you going to do after the next revolution? Get rid of the old selfish and exploitative leader and hope that just by chance his replacment won't be another selfish and exploitative leader?

We know how that ends.

^ I beg to differ with Tito though. Seeing that Tito had good will for Yugoslavia clearly disproves such "unchanging". If we are intellectual beings, we can change our personality when it comes to leading a socialist state. Is the cycle unbreakable? I do not think so. If Tito disproved reactionary commies with his benevolent and charismatic personality, then it clearly presents solid evidence that there is a chance of an actually competent leader. It just takes the right set of trials of suffering and studying the injustice and identifying the exact issue to make one man a great leader for all.

Not saying strong socialism can work in a big nation state, but I don't think this idea of buying the means of production from the elite is the best thing to do, although it may be better than nothing. The wealth would still be concentrated into the same small number of hands. Another option would be confiscation, just taking it. We already have this to a small degree with taxation.

OTOH there's a lot to be said for just working for an employer if the conditions are fairly good. I've been in a worker co-operative, and although there was a definite sense of autonomy and dignity about it (rather like running a business), we worked harder and longer than I ever worked in an ordinary job.

You're thinking of this as a zero sum game. How can you think of this as a positive sum game?

Remember there is no absolute fixed limit on the number of factories that can exist in the world at any one time.