Comparing property law under hammurabi with property law as it presently exists is absolutely laughably ridiculous and you know it is. You should take your capitalist apologia elsewhere.

You seem to be arguing words and not ideas.

You, "Bingo bango! You made a statement that can be technically untrue, therefore you are entirely incorrect!"  

Debunking someone's point first requires engaging with it and you never even came close. So what about Mesopotamia? Let's take your word on that, does it change the core point? Nope.

You, "Shazam! People were stabbing before capitalism, therefore when someone gets stabbed under capitalism, it's fine! Shazam!"

Then you go on to say that because a certain type of violence happened before capitalism, it's cool that it exists.

You, "Kersplat! You are icky, and I will stop there, the rest of your post is probably stupid anyway!"

Do you have brain damage my dude?

As I understand it, the comic states :
1. Create penalties for not being a property/capital-owner.
2. Acquire property/capital through violence
3. With violently acquired capital-backing, use step #1 to exert control
4. Population attacks itself to avoid rule #1, clawing to attain property/capital
5. The system promotes population infighting, allowing the power-holders to exist un-noticed.

Who gives a shit about who invented the baton when you're getting hit in the face. Well, I expect that you do.

^ This is the winner, right here. The crux, as it were.

Modern society always ultimately boils down, eventually, to might makes right... just with some extra steps.

Very true, although I can't think of a better solution than having the state monopolize violence and enforce things like personal property etc and that's not necessarily anything specific to capitalism either.

You are speaking truth, going vegan has one of the highest possible personal impacts. Eating animals is one of the main reasons for the massive land use, since we need it manly to feed animals, therefore it is reducing biodiversity.

Personaly, I don't think the second part of your comment is sensible. Beeing aggressiv and making accusations (even if warented) will not change peoples minds but make them defend themself. But again, that's just my view.

(edit to reword a sentence)

Personal responsibilities and actions are important ofc but pale in comparison to systematic, structural change that is needed. E.g. a few people significantly reducing their diet of animal products or going vegan is great (hence I did it), but as long as slaughtering and abusing animals is subsidized by billions from the state level this won't have a large affect :/

BP's carbon footprint propaganda did a lit of damage.

I think you just have it misunderstood. The comic assumes that you are the laborer, not the capitalist. As the image at this part of the infographic shows, from the perspective of the laborer, you are paid $5 for an item that is sold on the market for $50

This is just a comic I found, if you have some good memes feel free to share

(1/56)

Side note, any ideology that claims your neighbors are the enemy aren't worth a damn.

What is your criteria for "can actually be implemented in the real world"? This varies by the individual. I need to know what your perspective on this is. Could you explain why capitalism isn't violent?

The dude with a passion for septic infrastructure who wants to provide a rewarding service for the community, instead of getting yelled at by customers at the convenience store he works at to make sure he can afford the microwave dinner he's eating that night.

Pie in the sky scenario/sarcasm aside, criticism of capitalism doesn't mean pure anarchy. It means looking at what works and what doesn't work towards making sure people have what they need. Money is much easier to trade people to do a service than trading a goat for 2 sheep, but that doesn't mean that some landlord deserves 1 of the sheep and half the goat for "allowing" you to raise them under threat of starvation and homelessness.

Based on the above image, I'd say its the guy who sees a demand for septic tank maintenance and is willing to do that work for pay. The first issue is the disparity between the workers and the business owner. but if they're the same, you don't have that issue.

All the nitpicking aside, this is the 'somebody's gotta scrub the toilets' argument right?

The simplest answer to this I can think of is, who scrubs the toilets in your home? It's you right?

Do you do it because you own the toilet? Not necessarily because people who live in rented accommodation still scrub the toilet. So why? It's because you have an interest in not living in a place with a filthy toilet. Now suppose you actually had a local community, you'd have an interest in making sure nobody was living with a filthy toilet they couldn't clean because then they might get sick and you don't want that because you're a nice person and you don't like seeing your friends hurt. So you'd probably set up a communal rota, which is basically what people here in the UK already do because elder care on the NHS doesn't exist in practice.

Not really, private companies thrived under the Third Reich. Fascism is a capitalist ideology through and through

I am going to spare you the rant you so properly deserve...I guess it's still a rant, but it's a smaller one.

Behind The Bastards did this rant for me, and I expect you'll prefer their version, in the two-parter on Reinhard Heydrich, the architect of the genocide machine of the German Reich. (On YouTube: Part One and Part Two )

Some things you might learn:

• The holocaust during the German Reich ended with immense concentration camp complex and extermination engine. It didn't start that way. The turning point was the Wannsee Conference in 1942 in which Heydrich and Eichmann negotiated with German officials to resort to the final solution to the Jewish question, which was to shift from a policy of deportation and maintaining ghettos to a policy of extermination. (If we go by the movie Conspiracy it took them an hour just to clarify they were talking about extermination without saying words meaning extermination)
• The Holocaust didn't start that way. In 1936 the Sicherheitsdienst (SD) run by Heydrich gathered up select undesirables and packed them into an unused munitions warehouse which became the first concentration camp. As the population outnumbered the capacity of current detention centers, more were created.
• Even though the Nuremberg Laws only specified the detention and containment of a narrow field of undesirables (e.g. Jews with known criminal records) the SD rounded them up liberally, taking anyone who couldn't immediately defend why they shouldn't be arrested. Compare ICE in 2016-present rounding up any undocumented immigrants they can track for deportation, despite that they are supposed to only arrest those who are violent felons. (Being undocumented is a misdemeanor.). Meanwhile compare the SS (which is loyal to the Führer rather than to the German state) to the Department of Homeland Security which is loyal to the Presidency, and not the Constitution of the United States and the US State.
• The mass annihilation of Jews and other undesirables started long before the Auschwitz (the prototype for the death camps) and the Wannsee Conference. During Operation Barbarossa (the war in the east) and the occupation of Poland (and the other annexed Baltic / Slavic regions) the Einsatzgruppen (SS Death Squads) would massacre villages that were either disobedient, or from which traitors came. Sometimes just gunning them down in front of a mass grave, or gassing them in death wagons (trucks with a sealed chamber into which the motor exhaust was piped). These proved too slow, but also was too hard on the execution troopers. Due to the high turnover rate and the frequency of PTSD symptoms, the Auschwitz camp was engineered so that no crewperson had to witness and process what was going on. Those who loaded the trains and packed the gassing chambers were a separate shift than those who picked up the bodies and transferred them to the ovens. The one who pushed the button was two steps removed from the one who had the authority to sign off on the executions, and neither of them had to see the victims or the processing zones.
  \

Fascism is the final defense of authorities who have run out of justifications for their power. And yes, many people would rather believe their woes come from the oddballs in the society they don't like rather than the fundamental structure of the system. It's a lie that people want to believe, rather than face the truth of the matter. And because we're so eager, it might kill us all.

It also tells us our plutocratic masters would rather drive the human species to extinction rather than give up their power for a better society. We've evolved to be social, but we aren't really all that great at the society-of-millions thing.