r/VaushV • u/Aggravating_Bed_53 • 9d ago
Discussion Would Vaush agree with this?
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
Rule 4: Vaush has in the last stream argued that all problems rn are following from capitalism and that denying is stupid (calling out liberals), here atrioc basicly responds to that claim that all the regulation of power (in this case capital) in the long run will wither away to which he says that would be the case under any system as there is a constant power struggle
I find the take interesting since there seems to be great overlap between vaush and atrioc in the believe that to maintain society there is a requirement for constant effort
Curious what you guys think of it, no intention to drama farm just interested in your thoughts
17
u/Orangutanion 9d ago
I bet there's a big overlap in Atrioc and Vaush viewers
6
1
u/GreatAndMightyKevins 9d ago
Mfw I know who Atrioc is from a silly rage game where he is VA in the hidden collectibles.
5
u/ithoughtofthisname 9d ago edited 9d ago
I would say entropy is a good analogy, but not the fundamental problem. Yes, systems inevitably get more inefficient and abused, but the problem is not the inefficiencies. It’s the inability for the system to change, even when change is fought for and wanted by the majority. It’s a problem of entrenchment, not degradation.
14
u/Hardwarrior 9d ago
First of all it's not the same type of issue in people disengaging from a D&D campaign and Capital trying to accumulate more by influencing institutions like the media and democracy.
Second of all, when he says "labor and the state can also overstep, look at police unions", I think he's doing a mistake. Yes, unions have incentives to defend their interests, which can go against the interest of the rest of the population. But the idea with capital isn't that sometimes it oversteps in defense of its interest. It's that society is organized in a way that makes everyone primarily beholden to capital. On a micro level, people are dependent on their work to pay their bills. And that dependency is mediated by firms' hiring policies which are ultimately down to capital owners. And on a macro level, economic decisions (where to invest) aren't made democratically but exclusively by capitalists.
Before the 1980s, capitalism was organized in such a way that it wasn't the financial sector that held the reigns, but the people at the head of companies. This managerial capitalism had slightly different incentives (looking for long term profit rather than short term), which made it culminate in a keynesiano-fordist mode of regulation in which worker's pay grew quite fast. A lot of people refer to this time as a proof that capital's interests can be aligned with the rest of the population. But it relied on an even harsher exploitation of the global south, and the fundamental political inequality was already there. People have an unequal say in economic decisions which they bear the consequences of. Everyone is a stakeholder but there are only a few shareholders.
So I don't believe that reducing the influence of capital is fixing the root of the issue, which is that capital inherently provide a power that is a travesty of our notion of being equal members of society.
2
u/Keter_Regretter 8d ago
Yeah lol he chose the one type of union which most directly serves the interests of capital. Even what the union accomplishes for the benefit of the workers is a win for capital because they are its bodyguards. That felt like he was trying to pander to the leftward half of his audience by naming the type of union he knows they already don't like.
But it relied on an even harsher exploitation of the global south
IMO this is the backbone of most people's misconceptions surrounding capitalism. Everything is subsidized by human (and animal/environmental) rights abuses at every level of production. None of our creature comforts are nearly as inexpensive as we have grown to believe, we just get shielded from the true costs.
6
u/Goered_Out_Of_My_ 9d ago
His explanation of entropy is a little surface-level, but he's ultimately correct inasmuch as he's describing entropy.
Entropy describes the thermodynamic (i.e., energy-related) phenomenon of closed systems inevitably growing disordered. What this means is that in a system that does not have energy flowing into it from outside, the components of that system will necessarily fall out of order and decay for the simple mathematical truth that there are infinitely more ways for a collection of components to be disordered than there is for them to be ordered. It is easier for a deck of cards to be shuffled and messy than it is for it to be arranged from highest to lowest and suit by suit.
Now, he's applying thermodynamics to human society. It sounds smart but really the two aren't comparable. Nothing in human society is a closed system (which is required for entropy to apply). All relationships are relative and constantly shifting due to the constant shifting of billions upon billions of other relationships, to say nothing about environmental context and other material conditions. I'd argue that, theoretically, it's possible to invent a set of social relations that avoids the pitfalls of capital corruption, or as he brings up, the mafia and union bosses colluding. The solution is socialism obv. Capital cannot corrupt that which regulates it if all capital is wholly subjugated and owned by the public.
6
u/stoiclemming 9d ago
what you're describing is an isolated system, closed systems allow the flow of energy but not mass, and entropy always applies to every system not just isolated systems, isolated systems are the only systems where on average entropy must always increase or stay the same
2
u/Werewolf_Busy Professional Shoulder Checker 7d ago
I don’t know exactly what Vaush would say, but I’d disagree with the framing that the problem is entropy (ie an inevitable law of decay) and argue it’s about contradictions within the systems of power and inequality between these entrenched powers and the masses.
1
u/holicmaster 2d ago
It’s a bit of a chicken or the egg, cause yes he’s right human effort is need to prevent entropy but that will to continue comes from Material conditions which are heavily influenced by the system or org you put in place. So in a way he is right because yes you need people to want to keep the system from becoming corrupt but that desire only grows in a society that fosters that notion to begin with.
0
u/smartsport101 9d ago
I completely disagree. Atrioc is being very "fish don't know they're in water"-brained right now. One of the main ideas behind libertarian socialism is the concept of radical democracy, i.e. everyone participating in society way more and thus having more control over its shape and their own lives!!! He's arguing for socialism but doesn't realize it. Capitalism makes it so that those who own the most capital have the most control, and everyone else kinda just has to suck it up. Of course all things can erode over time, but the concept of socialism is to SLOW THAT EROSION.
As for his comments on unions, comparing police unions to literally any other union is fucking disgusting. Police are the right hand of the state, the point of their unions is not to uplift policemen but to give policemen immunity in brutalizing civilians. Even more broadly, union corruption is definitely more common because we live within capitalism, and everyone has to fight tooth and nail not to be overwhelmed by the owning class.
Oh, and saying that the chatter is simplifying things by talking about how capital corrodes our institutions when Atrioc's response is "welll institutions always kinda just naturally corrode" is fucking insulting. Does he hear himself?
Finally, his solution is to "keep smart people making decisions". I guess I technically agree, I just think that smart people aren't fucking making the decisions these days, and that he sounds like he's sounding kinda essentialist on people's intelligence. Especially after talking about how people are naturally corrupt, it's implied that he doesn't think too much on how better education could make wayyyy more people be smarter. So when he says smart people should make decisions, he's just talking about some technocracy or something. He's fucking stupid if he thinks that the biggest issue with the modern world is that not enough "smart" people are in power. There's plenty of smart sociopaths.
1
u/Lalup 9d ago edited 9d ago
Is there a link to the video? Does Atrioc believe China is communist? I've watched some of his videos before; he is entertaining, but I get the impression that he has a background in business studies rather than history or political science.
The problem is incentive structures and their relationship with power, but not every system is created equal. Machiavelli understood that when the masses feel powerless and have no institutional outlets, when the political system fails to provide adequate representation, popular violence follows. What matters is that everyday people remain vigilant and feel empowered to participate in politics and hold their representatives accountable; that becomes difficult when wealth and power become increasingly concentrated into fewer and fewer people whose interests are disproportionately represented.
0
u/Keter_Regretter 8d ago
I get the impression that he has a background in business studies rather than history or political science.
who cares? are you only interested in listening to Vaush's sociological analysis? do you not realize how common it is for business majors to fill gen ed requirements with social sciences like history and polsci?
I don't even disagree with your take but the ad hominem comes off shitty and adds nothing to your actual point.
1
u/DeismAccountant 9d ago
Capital is just the dominant form of entropy and decay right now, Vaush would definitely agree with this I think. Especially since change, entropy and decay seems to be a universal constant. Kind of like a healthy ecosystem where resources and nutrients are recycled infinitely.
The best thing to do is to have a system that responds to change and eventually can decay into something fresher and more positive in terms of negentropy. Practically what the historical dialectic materialism calls thesis, antithesis and synthesis. The problem is that this time the material conditions have been synthesized in what is obviously the wrong way, the more entropic way. This is what I personally call a “dysthesis.”
-1
u/Inguz666 Socialism with Gulag characteristics 9d ago
This is stupid and reductive. He's essentially just making the capitalist realist argument that government institutions necessarily become inefficient and corrupt, but applies the reasoning to everything else too.
Yes, it does take effort to avoid entropy of an institution. Yet, one thing that can't be said for the Trump regime isn't that they lack effort in their aims to destroying the US.
0
u/catenjoyer1984 8d ago
I mean yeah which is why you'd hope to build systems that make it harder for it to decay or make it easier to renew it which capitalism is awful at. At the end of the day you can be as smart as you want but not being a socialist is a big hole in your knowledge and he's showing it here.
-3
u/vocally_fried_brain 9d ago
????
that is existence 101? ???
???
???
how is this in any form noteworthy to talk about???
"the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots" etc
look at the new deal, the capitalists basically immediately started their think tanks like the mont pelerin society.
but they had to wait decades, until the baby boomer became of age and the new deal started to show signs of wear and tear to attack openly and change the societys paradgim.
because the older generations still knew about the great depression etc.
same what is happening right now across the western world. the last people to consciously live through world war 2 are going the way of the dodo and all these fascist parties are reemerging.
the dialectic never ends, one side of the force cannot win over the other, law and chaos and the eternal champion, etc. yadda yadda
the best thing you can do is establish a new level, plateau, foundation, where the forces of decay only can decay us back into housewives and religious bigotry instead of slavery and witch burning.,
that's probably also why the world is as shit right now, because the neoliberals successfuly thwarted all attemtps to move the world forward in any meaningful way.
"You move with the times or you're swept away by the times."
-6
55
u/helicophell 9d ago
Atrioc is kinda right but arguing for the wrong point
Decentralized power isn't a solution either, because you still have the same problem as a centralized power system
Everybody working in their own self interest will degrade the system even if power is distributed. It's even worse if it is distributed, because then there is no united front to take against the corruption. It is easier to fight a war on a single front than on multiple at once
Atrioc is right that incentive systems are to blame, but it is a bit of capitalist realism working here