BC SOCIETY
Saved by @jay_millerjay

Capitalism demolishes society and, with it, itself.

A thread.

1/

 Prior to capitalism, there were plenty of elite-centric, exploitive systems in place. European and Japanese feudalism. Roman mass slavery. The corvee labor of the ancient hydraulic state. Etc.

2/
But as exploitive and repressive as these systems were, they still retained some sense of mutual obligation among classes. Elites depend on the masses to survive and thrive. You can only exploit them up to a certain point, beyond which you threaten your own labor supply.

3/
Consider this quote from Kenneth Jupp on European feudalism. Feudalism entailed *mutual obligations* between rich and poor.

4/
These obligations were not equal, uniform, or always universally respected. But they were at least *there.* In return for labor and agricultural surplus, a feudal lord was obligated to protect his villeins, provide them justice, and respect their usufruct land rights.

5/
From Jupp again, feudal lords were also obligated—by self interest as much as ancient custom—to provide the basics of production—homes, tools, etc—to their villeins.

6/
If you’re living off the labor of others, *it doesn’t make sense to leave the ability to produce or even reproduce labor up to chance.*

But then along comes capitalism.

7/
I’ve written about the late medieval price revolution elsewhere, but to sum up: there came a point where the value of the poor’s obligations to the rich dropped below the opportunity cost of the rich’s obligations to the poor.

8/
So the rich revolted against the poor, seized their lands, outsourced security to the state, and basically canceled all their obligations to the poor.

9/
People like to justify their actions, so they concocted an ideology—liberalism, the Enlightenment, etc—that held that *no one* had any a priori obligations to anyone else. It was all voluntary!

10/
It’s not hard to see what a bait-and-switch this was. The poor still had to labor for the rich to gain access to the resources they needed to live. Their obligations were de jure but not de facto eliminated. Only the obligations of the wealthy were actually erased.

11/
So we end up with a society dominated by the sociopathic idea that none of us have any obligations to each other and we’re all just atomized, alienated individuals with no ties to each other. (Cue an epidemic of suicide, depression, substance abuse, etc.)

12/
In the centuries since then, this ideology has only gotten more extreme and encompassing. Even *Friedrich Hayek* argued in favor of state-run social welfare, environmental protection, worker rights, etc, in “Road to Serfdom.”

13/
He’d basically be considered a communist in today’s political landscape, because we have taken this ideology of *no obligations* to its logical, fanatical extreme.

14/
To wit: the (now former) mayor of a Texas town—what’s the point of having a mayor if not for situations like this?—making this point crystal clear in real-time.

15/ https://t.co/yYv44pqvNW
We hang on to scraps of our primordial sense of mutual obligation. The rich have privatized resources we’d otherwise be free to access, but in emergencies we still drop the pretense a bit and (temporarily, marginally) de-privatize essential resources.

16/
So consider that we marshal public resources to help people in disasters, disrupt markets with laws against price gouging, etc. But for people like this Texas mayor, *even that is too much.*

17/
Go watch the brilliant Chernobyl miniseries if you haven’t already. It deftly illustrates the ways that the late Soviet ideological package—secrecy, siege mentality, careerism and bureaucratism, suspicion and surveillance, etc—all add up to an inability to confront disaster.

18/
And then consider the ways that *we in America* have boxed ourselves into an ideological corner, in which the most basic elements of living in a society together are viewed as the worst forms of tyranny.

19/
We could easily make billions of N95 masks, but we still don’t have enough. The disaster in Texas was easily predictable & avoidable, but children are freezing or suffocating to death *right now* because of a fanatical ideological commitment to a stunted vision of “liberty.”

20/
Over and over, we find ourselves unable to address challenges, not because we lack the resources but because we have been led to believe that even the mildest of collective action is communist tyranny.

21/
All of this so the rich can justify holding on to every scrap of marginal wealth, no matter how many people die from an avoidable virus or freeze to death in their homes while the rich vacation in Mexico. There is nothing *substantive* stopping us. Just ideas.

22/
Marx observed the contradiction inherent in capitalism: the profit motive drives the capital class to lower wages as much as possible, but this leads to immiseration that undermines the capital class’ ability to sell anything. It would eventually undercut itself.

23/
Was Marx too optimistic? We’re going to destroy ourselves first by stubbornly refusing to respond to avoidable disasters. We’re passengers on a sinking ship refusing to bail out the water because it would “violate our individual liberty” to take care of each other.

24/end
PS: The main ideological difference between the two main political parties in the US hinges on this: do we dismantle *all* obligations and let the rich suicidally accumulate wealth to the point of immiserating and destroying the labor that creates their wealth?

Or only *most*?
PPS: LOL https://t.co/AIIrX6cAVv

More from Society

s. e. smith
s. e. smith
@sesmith
Oh are we talking about Sheryl Sandberg again? Well, your reminder that disabled feminists, LGBQT feminists, and feminists of color criticised her ‘lean in’ deal from day one. Don’t let anyone retcon that out of existence.

Like, a pretty narrow slice of feminists actually endorse and support corporate feminism, they’re just white, nondisabled, straight, cis, and noisy so their voices have a bigger reach.

So if your impression is that ‘feminism’ gave her a ‘free pass’ maybe you should question your overall impression of feminism rather than continuing to centre a handful of people as ‘thought leaders’ or whatever.

Critics within feminism have been doing this work for a long time and have been getting shat on it for about as long and I'm tired of seeing them erased. But what do I know — I am, after all, not a feminist.

But I WILL say, from my not-a-feminist perspective, that people who aren’t feminists who are criticising feminism should maybe understand the movement more deeply beyond a handful of high profile celebrity feminists.
TECH , SOCIETY
Kelly Ellis
Kelly Ellis
@justkelly_ok
So, I want to talk about how sexual harassment and fair pay are linked at Google (and beyond), because I think that's an angle that isn't being highlighted enough in the coverage of these walk-outs. I'm going to frame it largely around my personal experience there. Thread.

When I was sexually harassed by the director of the area I was working in, I was afraid to report it because I was worried that "getting him in trouble" would result in the subtle retaliation of missed leadership opportunities.

I wanted to continue working on the team I was on, because I'd gained a lot of very deep knowledge and expertise in that area, as well as reputation and camaraderie with the other folks working in that area. I didn't want to make the situation more "difficult."

To get promoted at Google, several need to happen: 1. you need opportunities for ownership and leadership above your current level (basically, opportunities to show you're working at the next level you're trying to get promoted to). The work you're "assigned" has a big impact.

2. You need glowing reviews from peers, *at or particularly above the level you're hoping to get promoted to.* Basically, you need people a lot more senior than you to say you're doing awesome work.
TECH , SOCIETY
Advertisement
Yaneer Bar-Yam
Yaneer Bar-Yam
@yaneerbaryam
I have been working on pandemic outbreaks for 15 years.

There is a misunderstanding of the difference between the response in much of the West, versus successful countries (including New Zealand and Australia).

Summarizing:

1.Reactive versus proactive and goal oriented.

1/-

2.Mitigation (slowing transmission) versus elimination (stopping transmission)

3.Gradually responding to increasing levels of infection by imposing greater restrictions which enables the infection rate to grow (red zone strategy), …

2/

versus starting with high restrictions to arrest transmission and relaxing restrictions only when the number of new cases is so low that contact tracing or localized short term action can stop community transmission (green zone strategy, including localized "fire fighting").

3/

4.Trying to keep economic activity and travel as open as possible but perpetuating the economic harm and imposing yoyo restrictions, versus making an initial sacrifice of economic activity and travel in order to benefit from the rapid restoration of normal economic activity.

4/

5.Focusing attention on few individuals resistant to social action because of shortsightedness or selfishness, versus recognizing the vast majority do the right thing if given clear guidance and support, which is what matters for success, as elimination is a robust strategy.

5/
SOCIETY
Paul P.H. Wilson\u269b
Paul P.H. Wilson⚛
@gonuke
It is simply not correct to point fingers at wind & solar energy as we try to understand the situation in TX. The system (almost) had a plan for weather (almost) like this. 1/x


It relied on very little wind energy - that was the plan. It relied on a lot of natural gas - that was the plan. It relied on all of its nuclear energy - that was the plan. 2/x

There was enough natural gas, coal and nuclear capacity installed to survive this event - it was NOT "forced out" by the wind energy expansion. It was there. 3/x

Wind, natural gas, coal and nuclear plants all failed to deliver on their expectations for long periods of time. The biggest gap was in natural gas! The generators were there, but they were not able to deliver. 4/x

It may be fair to ask why there is so much wind energy in ERCOT if we do NOT expect it to deliver during weather events like this, but that is an entirely different question - and one with a lot of great answers!! 5/x
SOCIETY
Rob Ford
Rob Ford
@robfordmancs
Two things can be true at once:
1. There is an issue with hostility some academics have faced on some issues
2. Another academic who himself uses threats of legal action to bully colleagues into silence is not a good faith champion of the free speech cause


I have kept quiet about Matthew's recent outpourings on here but as my estwhile co-author has now seen fit to portray me as an enabler of oppression I think I have a right to reply. So I will.

I consider Matthew to be a colleague and a friend, and we had a longstanding agreement not to engage in disputes on twitter. I disagree with much in the article @UOzkirimli wrote on his research in @openDemocracy but I strongly support his right to express such critical views

I therefore find it outrageous that Matthew saw fit to bully @openDemocracy with legal threats, seeking it seems to stifle criticism of his own work. Such behaviour is simply wrong, and completely inconsistent with an academic commitment to free speech.

I am not embroiling myself in the various other cases Matt lists because, unlike him, I think attention to the detail matters and I don't have time to research each of these cases in detail.
SOCIETY

You May Also Like

Edwin Hayward
Edwin Hayward
@uk_domain_names
Ok, it's high time to look at the REAL effects of Brexit. As the Tories implode & Labour sits on its hands, companies are executing contingency plans, shifting jobs & assets, slashing investments, or redomiciling (accounting exercise). Happening NOW, not in a fantasy future. 1/95

Barden Corporation is closing down its Plymouth factory after 51 years, putting 400 jobs at risk, as its parent company Schaeffler shifts production to various sites outside the UK due to Brexit.

8 health providers have warned of medicine shortages in the event of a no-deal Brexit: "we do not believe that the current medicine supply plans will suffice, and we will have widespread shortages if we do not respond urgently."

Pfizer - $100 million on Brexit prep: "Pfizer’s preparations are well advanced to make the changes necessary to meet EU legal requirements after the U.K. is no longer a member state, especially in the regulatory, manufacturing and supply chain areas."

The Government has spent £4.2 billion pounds on Brexit preparations (£2.2 billion in previous Budgets, plus an additional £2 billion in the most recent Budget.)
POLITICS
Bartosz Ziembinski
Bartosz Ziembinski
@zmbnski
Still wondering about this 🤔


save as q
Q
Advertisement
Nikita Poojary
Nikita Poojary
@niki_poojary
Mr. Vijay Kedia built a net worth of over Rs. 800 crores.

But you probably never read past that headline.

So I binged hours of interviews to learn his investing principles and strategies.

Here are 20 lessons on investing from @VijayKedia1 Sir:

Collaborated with @AdityaTodmal


Before I start, a quick disclaimer, please don't ape his portfolio.

As the entry price, horizon and risk appetite would be far different than yours.

Rather lets draw inspiration and try to learn his stock picking skills.

Now let's DIVE IN👇

1/ Started off as a trader:

- Soon, beginner’s luck started to fade out and loses started to mount, to an extent where his mother was about to sell her ornaments.

- Although he was able to dodge the situation.

- This incident taught him the biggest lesson to have a stop-loss.

2/ Punjab Tractors:

- In 1990, he made his first investment by putting in his 10-years savings of Rs 35,000 in this stock, based on a news trigger that tractor industry will witness a turnaround.

- It worked and fetched him 4-5 times which he calls it as a fluke.


3/ He believes that an investor must possess three qualities:

i. Knowledge,
ii. Courage, and
iii. Patience.
GENERICLEARNINGS , ALL
Vibhu Vashisth
Vibhu Vashisth
@VIBHU_Tweet
AGAMA SHASTRA:THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE MARVELS OF HINDU ARCHITECTURE

Agama Shastra is a Sanskrit word that means the manual for worship, temple building, rituals etc in Hindu Tradition.From Sanskrit,agama means handed down by tradition and Shastra means a commentary or treatise.


Therefore, Agama Shastra is a collection of ideas that drafts the rules for worship, temple construction, spirituality and rituals. It has been a guideline for many Hindus from ancient times. It's a collection of Sanskrit, Tamil and Grantha scriptures that mostly contains...


...methods of temple construction, idol creation, philosophical doctrines and meditative practices. It came into being after years of assimiliation and from a variety of sources. Some parts of it are pre-vedic while some are post-vedic.


Hindu Temples are not just temples, they are the pride and identity of Hindus. They are the symbols of Hindu unity and their religious aspirations. Temples are the places of spiritual healing and are our connection with the creator almighty.


Temples are the priceless treasure of our History, Heritage ,Art & Architecture. Architecture that mesmerises and spell bounds you. And Agama Shastra is that very text which is responsible for such a mesmerising and spell binding quality and beauty of our Hindu Temples.
ALL
Rich Energy
Rich Energy
@rich_energy
Great seeing one of the fastest natural drivers of the last decade Robert Kubica today with @WilliamsRacing at @COTA #USGP #f1 #robertkubica #Poland #richenergy
ALL