An Observation on Anarchy and Steemit
I learned a while ago that my posts about politics and anarchy tend to get more votes and higher payouts than any of the other subjects I cover on this blog. Makes you wonder why I don't write about it more often...
This week I made two back-to-back posts about anarchy. One was on Anarcho-Capitalism and the other on Anarcho-Communism. Comparing the community's response to these partner-posts, I made a curious observation:
Isn't it fitting that my post on capitalism makes bank but my post on communism falls flat?
Right now, the two posts stand at these values:
"Is Anarcho-Capitalism an Oxymoron?" – $212.84
"Is Anarcho-Communism an Oxymoron?" – $5.88
Capitalism is making me rich. I put the same amount of effort into communism, but my community isn't rewarding me!
It's also worth noting that the latter post has had far more engagement in the form of comments. But that's largely because two users got into a big argument about the merits and faults of communism/capitalism and left a trail of 90+ comments in their wake.
So what's the lesson here?
Capitalism begets income. Communism begets fighting.
Thank you Steemit for reinforcing what I already knew!
~Seth
IMAGE SOURCES: 1
Any income for you is a loss for someone else.
It's not who has more that dictates the price, it's the level of scarcity of the item being traded. Obviously no one would trade a gold ring for a loaf of bread unless bread was very hard to come by. And, at least for the moment of that transaction, the person trading the ring must value the bread more than the ring. So they are receiving value for value.
"Rich getting richer, and the poor - poorer."
The evidence does not back up this oft cited claim.
Exactly.
Wealth is not a zero sum game.
Yes. It's +summ game if you do something together, cooperating, for all the community, not for yourself only. Ergo - communism.
If you don't improve yourself you won't improve the community, everything starts and ends with the individual.
That is why communism is evil, because it seeks to limit the individual.
Wealth is generated by creating something deemed valuable. That has nothing to do with "a loss for someone else." If I create wealth, I've created something that wasn't there to begin with. I haven't taken anything away from anybody.
What do you mean, let me repeat myself again while attempting to agree with the obvious
:3
Well, you got so many anarcho-caps on Steemit that I am not surprised tbh. An-Cap is the new cool thing now and real communists are a dying speciman.
I hope you didn't take any offense to this post. I meant it in jest.
And I really do appreciate all the discussion/debate that you initiated on my posts :)
none taken at all. I found it funny as well that caps made so much more than commis. Me and @baah ended up talking more about anarchy vs state than An-Com really... a discussion I fear I will have with you at some point as well ;).
I'm sure I'll give plenty more opportunity for that kind of discussion on my blog! haha.
I have an idea for an upcoming post that will be called something like, "Is Government Obsolete?" That might be your opportunity.
yeah, sounds like I am gonna comment on that one :3
It's up now if you're interested :)
Check it out here
Just made a comment. I really need to post on the topic before I write it all in comments ;D
Yeah, a lot of effort to distance yourself from communism in the beginning, middle and end lol.
^^ yeah I see myself as a socialist. There are actually so many movements on the left currently that I dont want to be a part of, even the smart ones fail to see some important issues in the way they act.
What a wonderful social experiment!
Haha! I certainly didn't intend it as an experiment, but the results are definitely interesting.
Hah sorry! What a wonderful accidental social experiment! :D It definitely seems to me a lot of the cryptocurrency-players around are interested in this technology not for communistic reasons but to take back from the big guys still in a capitalistic way. Big difference there.
Yes. And a blockchain-based platform like this will naturally attract more capitalists than anything else, so the results of my "experiment" should be taken with a grain of salt ;P
Interesting insight! :)
Great experiment we the newbees appreciate your post. It really for us. Wonderful discussion. As
I was there!
Very well observed, the way humans organise themselves is always contradictory and opposite whats good for us.
Can you elaborate?
it always seem to me that we as people, or even humanity in general know what should be good for us, i always remember the quote about, either socialism, or communism, i forget, that to each according to their needs and from each according to their abilities. We could live in a fair society were the weakest and poorest are looked after, but what we get are a few that have so much more than the rest of us put together.
And in much of Europe instead of working in a positive way to do something about those levels of inequality we exhibit apathy at the polls, we don't vote for a party that might change that.
Even on a personal level i'll drink that extra drink and have the next day ruined with a hangover knowing i should have made a wiser choice, obviously not everyone is like that, but i think a majority of us would like to do better and be better but we get bogged down with desires and chasing a life that isn't necessarily the best one for us or the wider community, if that makes sense.
I agree with what you're saying in general, but I don't believe socialism, communism, or even showing up at the polls will lead to the betterment of society. That begins with individuals, not with a system.
That's why I prefer voluntaryism and anarcho-capitalism. In a free society, people may not always do what's best for themselves or each other, but at least they won't be forced into some facade of "equality" at the barrel of the gun.
Good point, start with the individual, hopefully that then becomes society wide, i know enough to know i dont really have any answers though.
항상잘보고갑니다^^
:O Great