Stupid Capitalist Tricks

[The Architect Of Fate]

Just to be clear, Sungula, i have basic objections to two distinct things:

All right 

#1 slavery
*classic* slavery and *modern wage work* are not remotely the same. Imho it is a serious mistake of equivocation which does no favour at all to the workers and their case. That being said, i agree that in some places, under certain conditions workers have to endure slave-like environments, and this needs to be adressed.

1.They really are very similar and classic slavery ? you realize there has been more than one kind of slavery ?

Is the difference pay ? What's the difference the material between wages and the material compensation slaves received hell some slaves were able to make money  . Slaves in Brazil were often quite materially well off . 

Is it being sold ? What's difference between being sold into slavery and selling yourself into it vai (selling your labour) You do realize that in Greece , Rome in even some of the Atlantic slave states people willingly sold themselves into slavery  

Is it ownership? . What's difference between being owned by one master as opposed to a whole system that is made up of masters 

Is it force ? I would call poverty a form of force and one artificially created 

I could keep going . You say they are different but provide no differences . You say i conflate but were ?

#2 Capitalism
I have similar objections here. You cant flat out say that capitalism is bad and necessarily involves *slavery* (as you are using the term, see #1). We have lots of economies based on capitalism, with decent and effective regulations. The brush you are painting with is way to broad imh

Yes i can if capitalism requires wage slaves and wage slavery is a form of slavery then yes i can . Slavery also had regulations on how you could treat slaves etc . Regulated slavery is still slavery.

From what i have read and understood you may identify as a very left, maybe communist. If so let me add that i think much of Marx´ analysis of late 19th century economy was correct, but i strongly disagree with lots of his conclusions, particularly because i think he ignored human nature, or overestimated its ability to be changed.

Actually i'm an anarcho syndicalist and Marx is a relevant now as he was then . He may not have everything right but if he had been born today in don't think DAS KAPITAL would look that different . Are you suggesting human nature is Capitalist ? 

Also, imho, we never had any communist state (to compare anything to), because every single one who tried failed in one way or the other without even getting past some stages of socialism at best.

Yes we never had a socialist state only state capitalism .But never having system something is not proof something is wrong or counter to human nature .