askchapo

The one that I get is "competition breeds innovation". I think they're just wrong that it should always be monetary competition. Personal-prestige competition (such as academic reputations) can also be a powerful motivator. The USSR had a bit of this going on in the various OKBs.

Capitalism is better at making treats than any AES state was

innovation in weapons and other dangerous fields

Once upon a time, before finance capital took over, sure I guess. But, just look at hypersonic missiles. Every attempt by Lockheed-Martin to launch one blows up on the launch pad, and China keeps one-upping themselves in that space.

they understand that the universe is a vicious, dark, cold place that will turn you into a monster

they just think that's cool

Can we truly say capitalism does anything "right" or "well" when it inevitably leads to societal and ecological collapse?

Even when it wins, in the long term it loses.

productive forces

Although look at the Soviet Union between 1924-1945

Even China's HSR doesn't fall under a capitalist model

They were correct so far on the resilience of capitalism

NOTHING!

I think one depressing example is innovation in weapons and other dangerous fields. "If we don't build it, someone else will first" is unfortunately historically been shown to be true, has it not?

Capitalism didn't introduce "innovation" nor did Capitalism introduce "competition". People were technologically innovating before capitalism and will be technologically innovating after capitalism. "If we don't build it, someone else will first" was just as motivating a factor in warfare in the year 2024 BCE as it is in 2024 CE.

Capitalism is not an invention on a tech tree in a civilization video game. Capitalism is a unique historical confluence of several things happening around the same time: Rapid industrialization, the end of feudalism and serfdom, proletarianization of the peasantry, the rise of the bourgeoisie, the fall of the landed aristocracy, wage labor becoming the dominant form of labor, the destruction of the guild system, the creation of the factory system, hyperspecialization (division of labor always existed by hyperspecialization was unique in that you'd spend 12 hours in a factory doing exactly 1 task in the 19th century assembly line, rendering you unable to learn other skills or have any free time after work) the creation of the international credit system and national banks, the creation of the world economy, and the reproduction of capital through the appropriation of surplus value.

Another thing people don't understand about Capitalism is that Capitalism comes after Capital. Marx goes into nauseating detail talking about Pre-existing forms of capital, like merchant's capital, and usurer's capital, which predate industrial capital. Some people think capitalism simply means private property plus money plus trade. No. Those things have always existed. Capitalism involves a bit more than that. At least in the Marxist analysis.

If you're looking for things unique to capitalism as conceived by Marx: it was proletarianization, hyperspecialization, and industrial capital.

There’s only one thing that can break through an echo-chamber: dialectical materialism

honestly idk if weapons are an exampl of capitalism getting it right. I mean I guess, but only if you mean the bourgeois state not just capitalists of their own accord, they need a lot of prompting and funding to develop anything

They organize and put in work. Landlords and small business ghouls are always part of some organization, or email blast, or chamber of commerce, etc. Sometimes they need to show up to meetings and do what they're told to do (i.e. support X bill or donate to Y cause). And they will because the benefits they receive are worth the expense.

I think this is probably the wrong question to ask unless you mean "In what ways has capitalism been historically progressive compared to feudalism?" or something along those lines. Neoliberal capitalism is purely reactionary.

Internet piracy.

This reminds me of something.

I'll tell you the problem with engineers and scientists. Scientists have an elaborate line of bullshit about how they are seeking to know the truth about nature. Which is true, but that's not what drives them. Nobody is driven by abstractions like 'seeking truth.'

Scientists are actually preoccupied with accomplishment. So they are focused on whether they can do something. They never stop to ask if they should do something. They conveniently define such considerations as pointless. If they don't do it, someone else will. Discovery, they believe, is inevitable. So they just try to do it first. That's the game in science. Even pure scientific discovery is an aggressive, penetrative act. It takes big equipment, and it literally changes the world afterward. Particle accelerators scar the land, and leave radioactive byproducts. Astronauts leave trash on the moon. There is always some proof that scientists were there, making their discoveries. Discovery is always a rape of the natural world. Always.

The scientists want it that way. They have to stick their instruments in. They have to leave their mark. They can't just watch. They can't just appreciate. They can't just fit into the natural order. They have to make something unnatural happen. That is the scientist's job, and now we have whole societies that try to be scientific.

Imperialism

capitalism isn't right about anything, just like an abuser isn't right to engage in abusive behavior. similar to abuse, capitalism is effective at achieving its goals of putting others down to lift itself up. breaking these cycles is difficult, but that difficulty does not justify their existence.

IMO the last time capitalism got something right the Netherlands was still called Orange

I assume you mean liberals, not capitalists. Well-regulated markets are efficient ways of maximizing happiness when distributing scarce resources, provided needs are all attended to and people have a roughly similar ability to participate.

Living in a heavily industrialised/post-industrial nation is better than living in medieval pastoralism.

Military power is everything