this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2025
460 points (95.1% liked)

Late Stage Capitalism

2251 readers
127 users here now

A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.

A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.

RULES:

1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.

2 No Trolling

3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.

4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.

5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.

6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Sure, but in, for example, North America monarchism was extremely rare and as far as I know they were only significant in the Mississippian Culture, for a certain value of monarchism.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippian_culture

This culture is fascinating precisely because it both collapsed from the strain of the European-brought plagues and because the implicit heirarchy was both rare and yet still incredibly egalitarian compared to any Old World standard. It's precisely interesting because it seems to represent the very growth of inequality that begins with the creation of a noble class.

I'm not as familiar with Australia's tribal systems but my understanding is they also didn't have monarchism. That's two continents free or relatively free of the scourge of monarchy.

[–] primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Antarctica too.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Australia had a population between 350k and 1m around 1000 AD. In 1000 AD, the global population was between 350m and 425 M.

Claiming "it's an entire continent without monarchy" when that continent was empty isn't a rebuttal.

[–] primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Without feudalism. Not without monarchy. You can have non-feudal monarchism.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Kinda of feel like "those people don't count because I'm a racist and don't want them to count" was the bigger issue there

[–] primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I can't find the original comment, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the one who brought up monarchy. I can't actually tell what you're arguing about.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

The other person just said Australia doesn't count because they don't matter, fam, but you're arguing about feudalism vs monarchism when, just as an fyi, feudalism as a system is disputed as a modern abstraction in the first place.

[–] primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm kind of not. I think i was arguing that geographically disparate differences in well being were less likely to be exploitative in the pre-modern world. Being earnest on the internet is the worst experience and I need to stop.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I could swear that was a reply to some dumb bullshit. Sorry this is like five layers if pedantry deep with zero whimsy or fun. Every second I spend looking at this I lose respect for everyone involved.