this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
46 points (58.3% liked)

Memes

50016 readers
398 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lookupgeorgism@lemm.ee 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah that’s called economies of scale, these are not big in all industries and barriers of entry are also not big in all industries. So your argument is a good argument for why we have antitrust laws and why we need some companies and industries to be publicly owned, but this is not the case for every industry.

So what does your analysis of wealth concentration say? Has every capitalist country had increased wealth concentration? What type of wealth has increased in concentration?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

Different industries and sectors gradually scale differently, but all move towards concentration. This is consistent and graduated. Every Capitalist country has regularly seen this gradual concentration over time, even if temporary shifts against this trend happen.

Again, without an analysis of political power and taking an agnostic attitude towards production, you have what can sound to liberals as a good idea but is ultimately not a real answer. If the Proletariat cannot wrest control, all regulations and taxes will be enacted in a manner that suits the Capitalists in control if you get far enough in the first place. Wealth will continue to accumulate, as the entire M-C-M' circuit is based on growth in scale of profit, not steady cashflow.

The Marxist position isn't that moving towards full public ownership immediately is a practical solution, but that this is a gradual process that starts with the proletariat siezing control. I recommend you actually engage with Marxist theory.