this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
453 points (76.5% liked)
Asklemmy
43918 readers
1871 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is extremely reductionist as it's actually a fairly complex school of thought, but it's essentially just: everyone is equal and thus should have equal rights and treatment under the law. A basic example:
I have a cake and take it to a party with 7 others. We agree everyone should have equal right and access to the cake and so cut it into 8 equal slices.
Where as Capitalism is like: I decide because I came up with the idea of getting cake, I deserve more of it, so I take 50%. The host of the party gets a 20% cut. And the remaining 6 guests divvy the remaining 30% amongst themselves.
Isn't that like the definition of (clasical) liberalism?
Classical liberal principles like the principle that legal responsibility should be assigned in accordance with de facto responsibility actually philosophically imply anti-capitalist workplace democracy, and are not philosophically consistent with wage labor. Classical liberalism needs to return to its spot on the left