iPhone VS Socialism
"Look at all those poor people being miserable and poor while chatting on their iPhone!" This is an argument often used by libertarians, objectivists and other defenders of "real" capitalism. That argument is what's poor and should never be used again.
source: YouTube
The iPhone is also brought up when debating socialists, with nonsensical arguments like: "You call yourself a socialist, but I see you use an iPhone, one of the prime examples of what's been given to us by capitalism!" One that's often been used against me personally, as an anti-capitalist and a socialist, is this one: "If you're all for spreading the wealth, why not donate everything or most of what you earn to some charity!?" All these arguments are nonsensical, they're all straw-mans, all arguing against a point that's never been made.
Capitalism Didn’t Make the iPhone, You iMbecile
Let's tackle the iPhone first. The iPhone and almost every other popular technological advancement are NOT products of capitalism, and to believe they are is just ignorant. This is particularly true for the iPhone, which is an amalgamation of all sorts of publicly funded and collectively developed technologies. Almost nothing in an iPhone is new or revolutionary, or developed by the company itself. Just watch the above linked video to see how and why this is the reality. Generally speaking though, technological advancements are products of human curiosity, sharing ideas and collaboration. That's it, there's nothing mysterious or more to understand there, and these human qualities aren't exclusively linked to any socioeconomic configuration. What's true for capitalism though, is that it hinders greatly the "sharing" and "collaboration" parts of the equation.
Then there's that annoying and mindless argument that socialists should freely give away their money. Or that socialists aren't allowed to buy a nice home or an expensive car. This argument is a sneaky reversal of ideologies. Socialists don't advocate for, but expressly argue AGAINST charity or, to be more precise, the system that necessitates the existence of charity. Given the state of technological and social advancement in our age, socialists regard the ability to have a certain standard of living as a human right. And yes, that includes a smart-phone, especially now that we've built a society in which it's neigh impossible to thrive without one. Socialists do not agree with the absolutist right to every dollar you earn, when that right interferes with the right of everyone else to a decent living-standard, including free education, universal healthcare and so on. Not having these rights, makes large groups of people less free than those few who can afford to have these rights. And to be clear: it's the libertarians and objectivists who advocate for a society in which the poor will be taken care of through voluntary acts of charity, as they consider taxation to be theft and coercion. It's them who should freely give away their money to charity, as they advocate for the system that makes charity necessary.
I must admit that I love seeing these libertarian types being shown the error of their ways in a public debate. So linked below is a nice example for your enjoyment, between a socialist and a defender of Ayn Rand's objectivism.
DEBATE! Ayn Rand's Defense of Capitalism (Ben Burgis vs. Dan Norton) (Replay from Modern-Day Debate)
Thanks so much for visiting my blog and reading my posts dear reader, I appreciate that a lot :-) If you like my content, please consider leaving a comment, upvote or resteem. I'll be back here tomorrow and sincerely hope you'll join me. Until then, stay safe, stay healthy!
Recent articles you might be interested in:
| Latest article >>>>>>>>>>> | Belief Matters (repost) |
|---|---|
| Cannonball Fever | Not The Weather |
| Financial Freedom | Competition, AI And Money |
| Chile, Revolution And Disney | First Cause? |
Thanks for stopping by and reading. If you really liked this content, if you disagree (or if you do agree), please leave a comment. Of course, upvotes, follows, resteems are all greatly appreciated, but nothing brings me and you more growth than sharing our ideas.
Publicly Funded or otherwise, people still got paid for their efforts. But trading ones time and effort for money isn't capitalist enough.
Sure it does, don't waste your breath explaining or supporting what you say.
I like how you avoid the fact that those iPhones got produced with Free collaboration with free effort and without capitalism literally facilitating every step of the way. What have you to say for that,lol. Deny, obfuscate, avoid?
In other words you don't believe in charity because its the system's fault that things are as they are.
Wow. So charity to you, is an admission that capitalism is broke, because you are entitled to Services and Products that require others to fulfill them, but which you seem to avoid explaining what or how those will continue. You know, what's the incentive for a socialist to extract resources out of the dirt, to navigate laws and property rights, when they detest any such things, they detest Free Trade, detest private property, and they detest individual rights as they will always put the Collective above the individual.
That certain standard of living got handed down to you, but don't bother explaining to us how it'll be that services and products will continue in lieu of people getting compensated to do so.
Yeah I'm sure you can conclude that capitalism makes charity necessary, as if there wasn't charity without capitalism, but don't let me stop you form defending not giving to charity, your right to a smartphone, and all the apps? Or why use a phone then? What about a car!? How about fashion? What about jewelry? Everything is a human right after all, how can you go bare and not crown yourself a king? Its all given anyway, I wonder how valuable making iPhone will be, all that human creativity will surely manifest the millions of phones because why not, charity is after all, only because of capitalism, and iPhone, they are because of human Collaboration.