Yes just keep
screaming about HYPOCRISY
While not understanding a single thing about what you're talking about. You don't even have a conceptual understanding of what socialism is, you're conflating the baseline socdem standard statist rhetoric that you read in The Naked Socialist and have never bothered to actually figure out why things function as they do. It turns out that putting people with the political POV that disagrees with you in prison or destroying their lives for 50 years does an immeasurable amount of damage on an ideology in the political sphere.
Screaming about how believers in socialist theory and socialist ideals are forced to engage with the capitalist society within which they live is not in depth thinking, it's what dipshyt youtubers who don't actually have anything to say about anything deal with any sort of critique and push back. That's the depth of your "answers" on this issue.
You have conflated naturalism and socialism repeatedly in this thread, you constantly screed about how UBI is some demon coming to destroy the world while we increasingly become reliant on capital and the endless cycle of violence that it produces. To deny the proletariat the due course of their labor and the means to reap their own means from it without the need for capital is not some madness formed from random idiots. If you'd actually bother to do anything other than cry talking points that you heard from youtube and people yelling at you on blogs and actually read basic Socialist theory you'd actually come to understand that you're arguing something that doesn't actually exist. Socialism requires a mass movement from the proletariat and a complete dissolution from the class system.
UBI is a bulwark against the fact that yes, automation will make things more efficient, but there will not be enough jobs under capitalism to support the underclass and working class after it reaches a tipping point. Couple that with extreme climate change on the horizon, unless you want a Rothbard style libertarian hellscape wherein people sell their children on 'the market' (
) then people need something to support them when there are no more jobs available for them commensurate to a livable wage, which by the way UBI isn't even meant to be a living wage, most estimates place it as making less than the line to live in extreme poverty. It's not even an amiable, or socialist, solution. UBI is a decidedly capitalist methodology of dealing with the issue, just throw a perfunctory amount of capital to keep the system churning on as we spit the lower levels of our society farther and farther into the gutters.
A socialist solution is the total dissolution of capital to begin with. Not to "guarantee everybody a job" but to guarantee that everybody is entitled to a fair and equitable life, where they keep the fruit of their labor, where they don't need to worry about starving to death if they cannot provide for themselves, where nobody needs to die because "oops your healthcare provider doesn't cover that". It's not just your world dressed in a complete b*stardization of capitalism, it's the DEATH of capitalism through revolution and evolution of the working class against the ruling class. You're arguing from some Burkean position of the benign benevolence of the overarching system against the benign threat of metropolitan tax collectors.
You keep acting like we have a fundamental misapprehension about capitalism's benevolent hand, when you're so blinded by the girded, disgusting bloat that your beloved system has created that you can't see that all this mindless consumerist "innovation" is actively killing us. "It's not the companies fault that they're evil and killing people in China, it's YOUR fault for not living in a hut in the woods". Which is reductive to the point of not even addressing, you know it's bullshyt, you know it's all sophistry to keep from dealing with the elephant in the room. It's not some "GOT YOU" moment so you can feel oh so smart that you triggered the libs for poppa. Just because all of you are soulless husks with no ability to empathize with others doesn't mean you can pass your same empty cynical worldviews off on people you disagree with because clearly everybody that doesn't think like you is an uneducated rube, you're
ever so smart and better than them.
Hippies weren't what you should take from the 60's and 70's, what you should take from the 60's were the mass riots and constant political assassinations of oppositional candidates and figures to Capitalist thought and the decaying system, the gutting of the welfare state, the rise of the neoliberal left under Carter and the complete dissolution of any actual political opposition in our system to any real issues of economic and civic importance.
Capitalism doesn't provide people a fair shake, it provides a system within which the state and the ruling class are entitled to the overwhelming cost and value of your labor and life. Corporations are not people and they are uninterested in an ethical or polemic moral fortitude to support the society in which they are based. Corporations exist to make the people at the very, very top money and power and everybody else is along to subside on the table scraps.
Nebulous concepts like "innovation" are totally abstract and functionally meaningless. What is that even supposed to mean? Nazi Germany was a state run system, everything functioned through the state, and they were just as "innovative" in terms of military and practical use mechanical technology as the US and Great Britain during the war. You're going to need more than empty buzzwords that could literally mean anything to have any meaningful distinction in this ideological discussion. Artists, the bright, the driven, people like that have existed before we created "the market" and the systems that our current late capitalist society functions with. You're trying to paint it as if people just don't do anything if there isn't monetary benefit for them, and while I will even grant you that under the condition that this is true, it doesn't tell us anything about the depth to which the system "encourages it". Because the system is the one these people live within, of course it's how they produce their craft or ply their trade, it's the only avenue available to them. That's not an argument, that's sophist libertarianism.
Some reading recommendations, so you can at least understand the position you portend to be arguing against.
