 |
| Click for Artist's Description |
2019 Glyph Comics Award Winner (BEST COMIC STRIP OR WEBCOMIC)!
CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "The Bamboozle: Why ADOS hasn't received Reparations and why the 'Occupy Movement' failed." Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 03 Sep 2019. Pen & ink w/Adobe Photoshop color.
Muhammad Rasheed - The White Liberal's Classic Attempt to Cancel ADOS Reparations
Chelsea Rustad - Since when do liberals critique capitalism ever? The Democrats are an openly capitalist party.
Muhammad Rasheed - On social media.
Chelsea Rustad - I’ve literally never seen it happen. All they do is make excuses for capitalists and their failures
Muhammad Rasheed - I'm not denying that's your own experience. But my experiences with them are the inspiration for my cartoons.
Chelsea Rustad - ok well capitalism is 100% garbage and there is no such thing as capitalism for the people, unless those people are bosses, developers, and landlords
Muhammad Rasheed - That's the rhetoric propaganda of the followers of Marx. It doesn't accurately describe capitalism, but the crony corporatism which is the enemy of capitalism.
Capitalism requires the open markets to function, and those markets are vulnerable to the greed of the wealthy, who always seeks to close the markets with monopoly. Only gov regulation (antitrust law) can protect capitalism's for-the-people markets from the greed-fueled 1% grifter class.
Muhammad Rasheed - The bad guys of the story hate capitalism, and have no problem allowing you to continue to vilify it like this since they don't want it themselves. If you win in your desire to kill capitalism, the 1% will win.
Chelsea Rustad - Crony capitalism is capitalism. It’s never been good for anyone. Btw the 1% already one.
Muhammad Rasheed - Crony corporatism is literally the enemy of capitalism. I am under no illusion in that regard.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this, Chelsea. Your ideological opinion of the topic doesn't align with the facts of history revealed through my research. Capitalism isn't a tool of the enemy, it's a weapon of the people, and that's why the bad guys hate it.
Capitalism needs competition in order to work, while the bad guys cut off competition so all revenue will funnel to their little class alone. A multi-millionaire or billionaire class isn't possible under a well-regulated capitalist open free market competition. The signs are right in front of you.
Chelsea Rustad - you’re in the wrong forum if you worship capitalism. Capitalism is right wing, period.
Muhammad Rasheed - I'm Muslim. I worship the One God alone. Your comment is offensive.
Chelsea Rustad - Promoting a murderous ideology like capitalism in a leftist forum is offensive.
Muhammad Rasheed - Capitalism isn't a murderous ideology. The crony corporatism that usurped it to empower a 1% minority of greedy wealth & power hoarders are responsible for the murderous standard operating procedure that is falsely (and religiously) labeled "capitalism."
Muhammad Rasheed - The old trading companies that drove the logistics of the Trans-Atlantic Slave trade represented a cartel in partnership with the monarchies of Europe. They operated in a deliberately closed market, which means by definition it was not capitalism.
Brian Jones - Yes, when a true capitalist system begins there is 100% open and honest competition... among those who already have enough hereditary wealth to enclose large swaths of common means under their name, use that ownership to siphon off excess value from those who now have to labor for them in order to access wages and buy back access to the now enclosed commons, and to pay the state to turn the police into a force to enforce their enclosure claims against any organization by those without massive amounts of inherited wealth.
After that, anyone who had a family that managed to run the systemic gauntlet and gain a large amount of wealth can potentially acquire their own means of production with which they can siphon off the excess value of their own laborers.
With or without "cronyism", capitalism still relies a class of people who undemocratically own all the means to survival and voting with your dollars means that the people who own your labor and thus your wages can vote with your dollars no matter what you think.
Muhammad Rasheed - Brian wrote: “Yes, when a true capitalist system begins…”
It’s not a matter of how it begins; it’s a matter of how the economic system actually functions, what defines it, and what causes it to no longer be.
Brian wrote: “…there is 100% open and honest competition...”
The competition of the open markets is how capitalism works. Without it, it is no longer capitalism.
Brian wrote: “…among those who already have enough hereditary wealth to…”
Whether the people who show up to a given marketplace are able to take advantage of the obvious or established business opportunities presented is a completely different item. There is a certain amount of creativity in being able to see or find opportunities, even to create whole new markets. As long as the people are allowed to buy/sell in those markets in a well-regulated competition, it is a healthy capitalist system than works for the people, both as consumers and as entrepreneurs.
Brian wrote: “…enclose large swaths of common means under their name, use that ownership to…”
Once unscrupulous people start manipulating the markets to benefit themselves alone, locking others out to rid themselves of competition, we are no longer talking about a capitalistic system, but the diabolical enemy of capitalism.
Brian wrote: “…and to pay the state to turn the police into a force to enforce their enclosure claims against any organization by those without massive amounts of inherited wealth.”
This is the “crony” aspect of ‘crony corporatism’ that now shut down the open markets to benefit the few over the many. This is not capitalism, which requires the competition of free open markets to function.
Brian wrote: “With or without ‘cronyism,’ capitalism still relies a class of people who undemocratically own all the means to survival and voting with your dollars means that the people who own your labor and thus your wages can vote with your dollars no matter what you think.”
This part doesn’t make sense. When a successful, but greedy and unscrupulous businessman uses cronyism to pay equally greedy and unscrupulous government officials off to violate antitrust laws and look the other way so the businessman can close the markets by monopolizing the industry, it is now crony corporatism and not capitalism. The free markets of capitalism are fragile for this reason, and need the government to enforce antitrust to protect them from the very anti-capitalism practice of monopoly. The people need to use their political might to force the U.S. government to do its job to protect their markets from the wealthy and their greed-fueled overreach.
Laura Saylor - That approach has been a repeated total utter colossal failure because the very structure of capitalism is inherently designed to benefit what you refer to, in far right terms, as 'crony capitalism; or 'corporatism'.
Muhammad Rasheed - The greed of individuals on both the business side and the government side is the problem here. No matter what economic system is in place, there will be the greedy few conspiring to grift the people. The structure of capitalism was never the problem, but the mentality of the criminal grifter class willing to break capitalism's structure for their own goals to the detriment of the greater good.
Kyle Harrington - Late stage grift scheme that usurped capitalism?
I live in the UK, and know a fair amount about working class history. After all, we were the birthplace of the industrial revolution, the textile industry and the capitalist/worker class system.
Tell me, were things really wonderful during the early stages of capitalism, before organised trade unions? Before the working week? When half the kids were sent down mines and the other half lost limbs in factories?
- This meme is surely a joke.
Muhammad Rasheed - Kyle wrote: “Late stage grift scheme that usurped capitalism?”
Precisely so.
Kyle wrote: “I live in the UK, and know a fair amount about working class history. After all, we were the birthplace of…”
It sounds like you’re saying that because you were born in a particular place, it magically means you are an expert in a subject without needing to do any research into it. Do you expect me to take that seriously? Please do a better job in making your point clear if this is not what you meant to convey.
Kyle wrote: “Tell me, were things really wonderful during the early stages of capitalism, before organised trade unions?”
Yes, for as long as the open markets were allowed to provide safe spaces for businesses to fairly compete. The problems began, in the usual fashion, when the most successful businesses partnered with the gov to selfishly close the markets with monopoly—the open markets capitalism needs to function on its most fundamental level.
Our organized trade unions were started by white racists who sought to monopolize the trade jobs from the black American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS) whose legacy of skilled-trade hard work they carried over from the slave institution. The original trade union whites resented ADOS and sought to take that inherent job security piece from them for their own use.
Kyle wrote: “Before the working week? When half the kids were sent down mines and the other half lost limbs in factories?”
Government regulation is a normal part of capitalism, which requires it to protect the markets anyway. If the people determine that hey require further gov protections to guard them from the meanness of unscrupulous and greedy individual employers, what of it? How would that be a slight against the economic system itself?
Kyle wrote: “This meme is surely a joke.”
No.
Timothy Fitch - The only party that represents the interests of the international working class is the Socialist Equality Party. The rest manage/negotiate within capitalism and always fail
Muhammad Rasheed - Does the Socialist Equality Party support reparations for the black American Descendants of Slavery?
Bob Heather - @Muhammad... why are you so in love with a system that is designed to oppress and exploit you? There is no equality under capitalism.
Muhammad Rasheed - I'm not under the anti-capitalism delusion of that ideology and quite simply disagree with you, Bob.
Bob Heather - @Muhammad... so, you want the oligarchs to continue to buy politicians and rule over the common person. You do realize, fascism is the strong arm of capitalism, right? The two are inseparable.
Laura Saylor - @Muhammad... I, for one, support reparations and oppose capitalism and support socialism.
Brian Jones - Any revolutionary dismantling of capitalism should require some method of paying back laborers for their stolen value. And in the US any attempt at that needs to have a special focus on repaying the frankly inhuman systemic theft of labor value and human life ADOS have suffered under slavery, the "except as a punishment for crime" loophole in the 13th amendment, Jim Crow, New Deal redlining, the so-called "war on drugs", white supremacist takeovers of police departments... I'll stop now because this list keeps fucking going...
Short version, any Socialism worth its mission statement should view reparations to ADOS as an imperative. Any that don't are dragging around ambient systemic racism and need to correct that.
Laura Saylor - @Muhammad... I generally agree with much of what you post if not all of it other than the capitalism thing, and I'm being honest here, hoping for dialogue, how you get to the pro-capitalism view from everything else we agree on, because it's such a radical difference.
Muhammad Rasheed - Bob wrote: "You do realize, fascism is the strong arm of capitalism, right?"
I "realize" no such a thing, and quite simply do not partner with you in your anti-capitalist ideology.
Muhammad Rasheed - Laura wrote: "I, for one, support reparations and oppose capitalism and support socialism."
The point of Reparations is to close the infamous racial wealth gap, restoring the stolen inherited wealth to the black American Descendants of Slavery (ADOS). This will enable my ethnic group to successfully build up the community using capitalist principles. There may be a conflict of interest between your political support items.
Muhammad Rasheed - Brian wrote: "Any revolutionary dismantling of capitalism should..."
...immediately cease & desist. I don't want to dismantle capitalism, but instead dismantle anti-Black systemic racism and the crony corporatism tool that enables it, restore capitalism and protect the free open markets with antitrust enforcement.
Muhammad Rasheed - Laura wrote: "...how you get to the pro-capitalism view from everything else we agree on, because it's such a radical difference."
My position on the topic comes from three converging lines in my research:
1.) The Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA) attaching itself in the 20th century to the early anti-racism civil rights movement specifically to indoctrinate the youth with its ideology.
2.) The formal, technically structure of capitalism, how it functions, what it does, what its strengths & weaknesses actually are, and what the economic system's natural predator system is that it needs to be protected from. This is very different from the ideological description of capitalism by it's CPUSA ideological rival.
3.) The detailed history of grifter culture at the corporate level, how it functions, what it does, why the 1% favor and protect it.
All of these items combined form my pro-capitalism opinion.
Brian Jones - It feels like one of the major disconnects between us here is that you seem to be arguing for a powerful centralized state authority that theoretically will reign in the power of the capitalist class. While many others on this forums are coming from a more Anarcho-socialist perspective.
Am I getting that wrong? Because what I'm hearing you say is something akin to a plan to use electoral action to update our laws in an attempt to force the state to turn against the existing capitalist class, which you believe to be corrupt, so they can be replaced by a new capitalist class who will now do capitalism correctly under pain of punishment by the new state apparatus. If that's accurate, that's a very liberal (as in Right-wing individualism) ideal because it treats the systemic issue as a problem of the individuals at the top rather than addressing the system that allowed those individuals to exploit others.
Muhammad Rasheed - Your insisting upon vilifying the economic system instead of the greedy men who broke it, is where our disconnect is found. I see zero value in your way of seeing it, since it takes the blame away from the dirty fiends who actually commit the evil.
Majel Kay - I believe greedy men invented it. I really don't see real reparations happening under capitalism.
Muhammad Rasheed - Greedy men invented the slimy grift that usurped capitalism and cleverly convinced their rivals that capitalism was still sitting in the spot.
I don't see Reparations being paid out until #ADOS fights for it till the end.
Kyle Harrington - Actually, yes. Because I was born in a particular place I'm more familiar with the history of that place than most people born outside of it. Partly this is due to the fact that my education included British history to a larger extent than yours, partly it is because my relatives were alive in the 1920s and partly it is because the living history is all around me, including old textile mills, musuems and the like.
And things were not good for working class people in early stage capitalism. City populations expanded and this meant disease and longer hours in more dangerous working conditions. The 1800s were not a golden age for most working class people.
Also, it seems like you want to have your cake and eat it. Do governments protect free trade or do they create monopolies? They can't do both.
Brian Jones - M. Rasheed wrote: "The problems began, in the usual fashion, when the most successful businesses partnered with the gov to selfishly close the markets with monopoly"
That didn't require partnering with the government. Monopolization happens naturally in capitalism. At the time, the only private-state partnership that was required was calling in the hard-power of the state to put down laborer organization. When the government moved to break up monopolies it took capitalism only a few decades to reclaim that new threat leading to the new version of monopolies where it's a single chain of individual corporations owned by parent corporations, none of which count as monopolies, but which control even larger swaths of the market than before for the benefit of those private owners at the top of the chain. Capitalist theory likes to say that competition will benefit the consumer, but in praxis, since profitability is the only end goal of private ownership, competition simply innovates newer and more effective ways to exploit labor and consumers to give less wages and product in exchange for more capital intake. Which directly leads to the consolidation of available capital into a smaller and smaller group while imposing wider and wider exploitation and debt on the rest of the population.
Muhammad Rasheed - Brian wrote: "That didn't require partnering with the government. Monopolization happens naturally in capitalism."
That's 100% not true. If they don't fraudulently partner with the gov to overlook the enforcement of antitrust, then there will be nothing to keep other entrepreneurs from disrupting the monopoly attempt from the free market righting itself with regular old price adjustment, or innovative marketing, etc.(see: Dell vs IBM).
Brian wrote: "At the time, the only private-state partnership that was required was calling in the hard-power of the state to..."
So you contradicted your own comment just one sentence later? lol
You don't have an argument, Brian. Stop.
Brian wrote: "...competition simply innovates newer and more effective ways to exploit labor and consumers to give less wages and product in exchange for more capital intake."
As long as the gov continues to enforce antitrust and prevents the larger companies from monopolizing the industry, then the normal competition benefits the smaller companies AND the consumer class. I can not only always take my money elsewhere, but I can also always just go to another employer who ISN'T exploiting the workers.
Muhammad Rasheed - Kyle wrote: “Actually, yes. Because I was born in a particular place I'm more familiar with the history of that place…”
So you think you magically know a topic and don’t have to actually study the principles and terms for how they actually work. You can just make up stuff and reinforce misconceptions and ideological myths by only interacting with people who think exactly like you. Curious.
Kyle wrote: “And things were not good for working class people in early stage capitalism.”
Sure they were. Especially since it didn’t take long from the larger companies to IMMEDIATELY start monopolizing the markets preventing others from creating better working conditions and wages to compete.
Kyle wrote: “City populations expanded and this meant disease and longer hours in more dangerous working conditions. The 1800s were not a golden age for most working class people.”
Working out normal growth problems comes with every large enterprise innovation. You don’t think that wouldn’t be an inherent problem under other economic systems involving large population centers of humans?
Kyle wrote: “Also, it seems like you want to have your cake and eat it. Do governments protect free trade or do they create monopolies? They can't do both.”
This is an example of what it sounds like when a person thinks they can magically learn about a topic just by spinning in a circle in the middle of their town and drinking with their mates at the corner pub. lol
It’s the government’s job to protect the open free markets from the threat of monopoly. Greed-fueled, unscrupulous government officials are in turn vulnerable to corruption in the usual fashion causing the gov to neglect its duties (see: FCC vs Net Neutrality; FCC vs Charter Communication mergers).
Brian Jones - Okay, so instead of just saying "you are all wrong, capitalism is actually good and it's just the people at the top of the system that are bad" why don't you take some time to explain your side here. You're in a leftist space pushing a right wing neo-liberal line about changing who's on top so that real capitalism can flourish. I hear enough of that in Georgia from Republicans who can't wait to see "the [Hollywood Globalist Elite] get theirs from Trump" so that "Real Americans" can finally flourish.
What makes you think that removing the current 1% from a system that lead to their creation won't just result in the inevitable creation of a brand new 1% that will do the exact same thing?
Bob Heather - @Muhammad... ok, bootlicker
Muhammad Rasheed - Brian wrote: "...why don't you take some time to explain your side here."
lol I'm literally doing that throughout these thread discussions, Brian.
Brian wrote: "You're in a leftist space pushing a right wing neo-liberal line about changing who's on top so that real capitalism can flourish...."
"Changing who's on top" is a straw man. My argument is that there's nothing inherently wrong with the economic system itself. The problem are the immoral, unethical individuals who come to the table to do capitalist business... they bring their corruption with them to that table and its why the laws are in place to guard society from the criminal class. We protect our own systems by holding the gov we elect accountable.
Brian wrote: "What makes you think that removing the current 1% from a system that lead to their creation won't just result in the inevitable creation of a brand new 1% that will do the exact same thing?"
1.) Of COURSE the exact same legacy families will try to maneuver their way back into the power position. That's why its the government's job to guard the system to keep that from happening.
2.) What makes YOU think the 1% won't take over your precious socialist or communist utopia in a perfect imitation of the Animal Farm novel?
Brian Jones - 1) Are you arguing for using hard state power to determine who is and isn't allowed to participate in a "free and open market" based on your perception of their motives? How much someone is actually allowed to succeed?
2) Utopianism assumes that the revolution stops. Continual revolution requires understating capitalist recuperation of existing revolutionary structures and being able to adapt to that and to better understandings of human needs and environmental limits. So I don't think many people here assume that the 1% aren't going to try it. They recuperate everything they're allowed to (see how the Civil Right's movement of the 60's is now treated as if it happened by "working with the system"). Also most here lean more an-com rather than state-com meaning that the idea of an unjustified hierarchy to sit on the top of as the "Head of the Revolutionary State and Party" is not really up our alley. If someone is in a position of authority they should be there democratically and under scrutiny to ensure they uphold the public trust.
Muhammad Rasheed - Brian wrote: "How much someone is actually allowed to succeed? [...] If someone is in a position of authority they should be there democratically and under scrutiny to ensure they uphold the public trust."
The 1% grifter class is the very definition of the "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and it is their hoarded wealth that gives them that corrupt power. 1% of the population controls 99% of the world's wealth and they will not leave that money on the table and just walk away just because we talk our ideological positions out into the æther. All of the world's problems throughout history can be traced to the greed-fueled manipulations of this moneyed class. It does NONE of us any good to allow individuals and/or corporations to amass the equivalent wealth of an entire sovereign nation; history has shown that such situations only make society worse. if we don't put a cap on how much wealth folk can amass through these business efforts, then they will do literally any and everything to position themselves to get more and more and more and more until they finally enslave us all.
________________________________
MEDIUM: Scanned pen & ink cartoon drawing w/Adobe Photoshop color.
No comments:
Post a Comment