• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    The context of discussion was whether the current stage of neoliberalism can revert back to some other form. And my point is that there is no path back within the liberal framework. A different economic philosophy that will succeed neoliberalism will not be based on the idea of private ownership.

    • Steve@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Now I understand. And I just don’t see that as inevitable.

      Private ownership is too important to people individually. Without it, we don’t even have any reason to expect any anything from our labor, since we can’t be said to own even that. There isn’t much room left for personal autonomy, if we don’t have defacto ownership of our bodies, minds, and effort.

      It would require some post-scarcity Star Trek technology to make our labor obsolete. Functionally infinite energy and matter replicators. The technological components would have to be in place, before the social changes become feasible.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        There’s a difference between private ownership and personal ownership. For example, in Marxism, personal property is very much respected. Nobody is coming after your toothbrush or your house. What’s meant by private property is owning enterprises that employ other people to work for you. This is replaced by cooperative ownership where workers own the business collectively.

        • Steve@communick.news
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          That may be an option then.
          Still not convinced it’s only way from here, or even the best way. It would depend entirely on the details.