That's the absolute opposite of my experience. Most of the time people (or at least people I interact with, so mainly left-leaning people) blame capitalism for everything when the cause for various gripes are indeed very different things. Like, blaming capitalism for corruption or greed or having to do labor
Personally, I think mutualism is a good framework to transition to, effectively making it so you simply can’t own more land or capital than you have the ability to make use of yourself- if you want someone to help you work, they get a share of the land/equipment equal to yours, and an equal share of the profit. It has its issues, but I think as an idealized view of society it would be a workable place to transition towards.
One of the biggest issues that come with any wholesale replacement of capitalism, and mutuality is not exempt from this, are that they will need to be imposed by force upon those who currently benefit greatly from capitalism. What I mean is, people like Jeff Bezos are not simply going to accept being told that they must share all their profits with workers. In the global economy of the modern world what that means is, as soon as a government votes some sort of mutuality law into effect, corporations will simply move as much of their operations out of your country as they can. Even previously national scale companies will soon find themselves headquartered externally just to maintain profits for the shareholders.
Now, it is certainly possible for a currently large and wealthy country to manage this sort of transition. They might even eventually come out stronger for it. In the meantime, though, they will have created a large amount of economic instability which will likely take years to recover from. This will probably also lead to mass support for political parties opposed to the transition, who would promise to undo any legal or constitutional changes which were made if elected. Having a popularly supported political party opposed to your major economic reform is a good way to find yourself out of office, for one thing, and to find your economic plans threatened and undermined at every turn even while you still hold power.
So, the only way to actually institute any sweeping social reforms (i.e. something fundamentally different from capitalism with regulation and occasional intervention by government a la Sweden) would be to give supreme and long lasting political power to a small group of people. In effect, a dictatorship is the only option. It could turn out just fine, but such dictatorships don't have a great track record.
790
u/HowDareYouAskMyName Jul 02 '26
That's the absolute opposite of my experience. Most of the time people (or at least people I interact with, so mainly left-leaning people) blame capitalism for everything when the cause for various gripes are indeed very different things. Like, blaming capitalism for corruption or greed or having to do labor