this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
129 points (99.2% liked)

Aspen Anti-Billionaire Society

118 readers
207 users here now

A community dedicated to spreading awareness of the negative impacts of the billionaire class, especially the 250 richest people on the planet

We believe that the existence of the 0.01% comes at a cost to the rest of us, even multi-millionaires, and hope to spread awareness of this problem among the 1% (who have the most resources to affect change)

All discussion and links related to wealth inequality and related activism are welcome. We hope that this community can serve as an easily accessible repository of information about wealth inequality

Please meet disagreement with civility so we can foster productive discourse

founded 2 days ago
MODERATORS
 

See the stickied comment below for an explanation and statement of our purpose, based on simple back-of-the-napkin math

E: if someone could please link this community to r/aspen and r/roaringforkvalley I would greatly appreciate it. I’ve been IP banned by the all powerful AI mod monster, like many folks on Lemmy

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Imperialism as a specific stage in Capitalism, not the general process of international extraction. Earlier forms of Imperialism of course exist, I assumed we all knew what I meant by my statement. Around the turn of the 20th century, bank and industrial Capital had largely monopolized in countries like Britain, France, Germany, and the US, and this monopolistic stage in Capitalism forced territorial division amongst these powers.

Prior to the 20th century, Capitalist development was largely internally driven, and monopolies had not yet formed. It was not possible for a few banks to control entire industries. There was still colonialism, in the traditional sense, but Capitalism had not yet reached the stage Marxists call "Imperialism."

If you'd like, we can call it "Capitalist Imperialism," as a separator from prior froms of feudal or mercantilist Imperialism.

Further, your conclusion doesn't follow. We would exploit the world more if the US remained Capitalist while paying its workers more. Capitalists would retain their profit levels and fund their workers with the fruits of more brutal Imperialism.

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I understand what you are saying now, in putting it that way.

I’ll ask a simple question, in your opinion, how is unfettered capitalism in the US hypothetically less exploitative of the rest of the world, the global south, etc, than having moderated capitalism? I do not understand that perspective. Especially in that the US adopting moderated capitalism would hopefully push the world in that direction more largely, given our, admittedly highly imperial, influence?

I would like to better understand why the current system is somehow less exploitative in your view. I would think at worst one could say they would be equally exploitative

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 23 hours ago

Moderated or not, US Capitalism depends on Imperialism, as all highly developed Capitalist systems do. Imperialism becomes an economic necessity for Capitalist countries thay reach the monopolist stage, which itself is an economic compulsion of Capitalism. Social Democracies like the Nordic Countries still practice Imperialism, and not at a lesser degree, just a lesser scale.

Further, that's even assuming we can moderate the system. All states are dominated by a class, in the US that's the bourgeoisie. We can't just say "these are good ideas and are what we want," the Capitalists have to want it too. That's why revolution is necessary. Socialism is necessary.