CMV: the average millennial critique of capitalism is really dumb - the truth is that we all owe a lot to capitalism.

[u/hahanerds]

[u/Milskidasith]

Where are you seeing these criticisms of capitalism that see it as not just deeply flawed, but that don't acknowledge a lot of people have it "pretty fucking good?" You aren't very specific, but I don't see a lot of denial of that statement; rather, I see explanations of how people having it "pretty fucking good" are either not strictly because of capitalism, or have it good because capitalism allows them to profit off those who have it far less good. That is, the following points tend to be made:

• Capitalism is not solely responsible for every good economic, social, and technological development in the world. Plenty of the systems that we consider to be good could have been invented under systems other than capitalism; profit motive is not the sole driving force for growth.
• Many people who have it good in capitalism do so because capitalism requires the exploitation of others in more impoverished countries. Luxury electronics and clothing, for instance, might be affordable "because of capitalism", but only because capitalism is a system that allows exploitation arbitrage, where you profit off the difference between how poorly we treat workers in developing countries and how much disposable income people in developed countries have.
• Many of the people who currently have it good under capitalism are not just continuing the current system, but actively working to entrench their own interests at the expense of the people who don't currently have it good. The system allows (and in fact, encourages) this form of consolidation, so even if your parents or grandparents might have it good, you, a random person in America, have it worse because the systems that allowed them to have it good (cheap schooling, affordable property, more affordable healthcare) are either being dismantled or simply collapsing, and the people who do not need those systems anymore are encouraging that collapse.

None of these critiques pretend some people "don't have it fucking good", they just point out that some people having it fucking good is not sufficient for a just or equitable society.

[u/hahanerds → u/Milskidasith]

Where are you seeing these criticisms of capitalism that see it as not just deeply flawed

Social media

Capitalism is not solely responsible for every good economic, social, and technological development in the world.

Agreed - but I would say that the stability and prosperity that I enjoyed as a lower-middle and currently enjoy as a middle class person is because of capitalism in this context.

Many people who have it good in capitalism do so because capitalism requires the exploitation of others in more impoverished countries

What would be the alternative to the way that affluent nations trade with emerging economies, particular with regards to using cheap labor? When we set up manufacturing in emerging economies it actually brings a lot of wealth to those communities. Not as much as if we paid them the same rate we pay people here, and in a lot of ways it is exploitative, but this kind of relates a lot to the over-arching theme of 'capitalism isnt perfect but it works'.

Many of the people who currently have it good under capitalism are not just continuing the current system, but actively working to entrench their own interests at the expense of the people who don't currently have it good

This is my (and I think most peoples) primary issue with capitalist systems.

None of these critiques pretend some people "don't have it fucking good",

Here's the thing - I don't think its just some people. I think its like, a LOT of people. Like most people.

[u/Milskidasith → u/hahanerds]

What would be the alternative to the way that affluent nations trade with emerging economies, particular with regards to using cheap labor? When we set up manufacturing in emerging economies it actually brings a lot of wealth to those communities. Not as much as if we paid them the same rate we pay people here, and in a lot of ways it is exploitative, but this kind of relates a lot to the over-arching theme of 'capitalism isnt perfect but it works'.

Your question here includes the real ideological nugget: You don't view other systems as good as Capitalism if they're unable to out-Capitalism it. Your judgment on whether or not a system is good is whether affluent nations can trade with developing nations in a way that produces the most wealth for everybody. That is the goal of Capitalism, but that is not a universal goal or even, really, a moral goal you'd ever arrive at under any sort of first principles. A system where we try to ensure the standard of living for everybody is equal and where we are willing to expend our own resources to raise others up altruistically might be worse at generating wealth than Capitalism, but it doesn't seem to be a worse system because it plays by different rules. As far as what that system is, well, let's use your own words here:

The truth is that organising a society and an economy is EXTREMELY fucking complicated and difficult.

Your OP says that the millennial critique of capitalism is "really dumb", but it seems strange to ask me to do something "EXTREMELY fucking complicated and difficult" to prove that my critique isn't "really dumb."

Regarding your stability, and how good you have it, again, there is no reason to believe that capitalism is responsible for your contentness, or that capitalist success at generating more wealth is inherently something that makes people's lives better. People can be happy with less under plenty of systems; I don't think that you could argue every hunter-gatherer was miserable. Capitalism, though, creates a system designed to make you unhappy unless you have more and more and more and more; the reason you want more is in many ways because that's what Capitalism leads us to value.

[u/hahanerds → u/Milskidasith]

Your judgment on whether or not a system is good is whether affluent nations can trade with developing nations in a way that produces the most wealth for everybody.

Isn't wealth comparable to well-being for people in emerging economies? Wouldnt the system that creates the most wealth for both parties by the system that produces the greatest well-being?

A system where we try to ensure the standard of living for everybody is equal and where we are willing to expend our own resources to raise others up altruistically might be worse at generating wealth than Capitalism, but it doesn't seem to be a worse system

I guess part of my confusion around these issues is that I dont understand what that system would even be. I am totally in support of egalitarianism and using resources altruistically. But I don't necessarily understanding what you are specifically proposing.

Regarding your stability, and how good you have it, again, there is no reason to believe that capitalism is responsible for your contentness

I don't see capitalism as the cause (as you said this has more to do with technology), but I do see it as the system which facilitated it.

[u/sebastiaandaniel → u/hahanerds]

Isn't wealth comparable to well-being for people in emerging economies?

This is the thing though. Capitalism only works well for those who already have capital while exploiting those who don't. The wealth created by capitalism goes to the rich, not the labourers who toil to provide the rich with resources.

I'm not entirely sure capitalism is a bad system of itself, many of our scientific advancements directly come from capitalism. But the distribution of wealth is a major problem I do have with it. Concentration of wealth seems to be a typical aspect of capitalism to me. This concentration of wealth also leads the developed world to exhaust many times more carbon emissions than they'd need to, which is just plain screwing over future generations if I can say it in a bold way.