How do you explain yourself to people who don't know about non-capitalist systems

[aziraphale]

I am sort of an unaffiliated anti-capitalist. I am still learning about the systems and want understand these very well before I join a particular strain of anti-capitalism. Well, nearly everyone who I've mentioned this to has gone on to state a list of ignorant stereotypes about anti-capitalism, such as that anarchists want chaos, all communists want dictatorships and socialism is capitalism with a good safety net. The general statement is that I'm wasting my time, things will never change and I should devote it to other pursuits. ..I don't know if I should wait until I know it very well or I should explain the points I know to people while also stating that I am still a novice. Any advice on this matter? Bad title, by the way, I meant "How do you explain anti-capitalism if you don't understand it fully yet"

[Stranger Than Paradise]

I understand what you mean, welcome to the board.

What you should do is describe the things which brought you towards believing in anti-capitalism and what this stands for. Say you believe in an equal democratic society and that you don't believe this is possible because Capitalism works in the interests of ruling class hegemony and can never fulfil the interests of the working class as such. Say you want a society based on human needs rather than profits.

[ZeroNowhere]

Perhaps it would be better to wait until you feel comfortable that you know enough about anti-capitalism to explain it well. Otherwise, it may well just lead to some degree of discomfort while debating, and may not come off as being as convincing.

[CartCollector]

Anti-capitalism is all well and good, but it's of no use if you don't believe there's something that can replace it. Then people will just tell you that your criticisms have no point, because they'll say that even though capitalism might have its weaknesses, it's still the best system we have. There's a few different types of economies that can be called socialist, be sure to read about all of them so you can find which one you like best:
-State capitalism
-Market socialism (sometimes called mutualism, I think)
-Democratic planning (a recent variant of it is called Participatory Economics or Parecon for short)

[Stranger Than Paradise]

There's a few different types of economies that can be called socialist, be sure to read about all of them so you can find which one you like best:
-State capitalism
-Market socialism (sometimes called mutualism, I think)
-Democratic planning (a recent variant of it is called Participatory Economics or Parecon for short)

The first two cannot be considered socialist because they operate within market economies.

[Old Man Diogenes]

I am sort of an unaffiliated anti-capitalist. I am still learning about the systems and want understand these very well before I join a particular strain of anti-capitalism. Well, nearly everyone who I've mentioned this to has gone on to state a list of ignorant stereotypes about anti-capitalism, such as that anarchists want chaos, all communists want dictatorships and socialism is capitalism with a good safety net. The general statement is that I'm wasting my time, things will never change and I should devote it to other pursuits. ..I don't know if I should wait until I know it very well or I should explain the points I know to people while also stating that I am still a novice. Any advice on this matter? Bad title, by the way, I meant "How do you explain anti-capitalism if you don't understand it fully yet"

I know things a lot better than I used to but its got no easier, I find ignorance a huge barrier to explaining anything vaguely left-wing, especially anarchism, people just don't want to seem to acknowledge capitalism's link to crime. One thing I find that helps is cutting down on leftist rhetoric, explaining in simple terms has won me some over.

[syndicat]

yeah that's the way to go, try to explain it ordinary language. i usually tell people I'm for self-management -- people having control over the decisions that directly affect them, and thus workers collectively managing the places where we work, replacing the bureaucratic state with something much more democratic, directly controlled by the people.

[Crusade]

Just explain the individual pieces of Socialism one by one. Show them the forest one tree at a time basically. That always works for me unless we fundamentally disagree along the way. Me: I don't like the fact that people starve, Person B: I enjoy the suffering of others, Me: Oh, ok

[mikelepore]

The general statement is that I'm wasting my time, things will never change and I should devote it to other pursuits.

Here's something to think about. In the U.S. slavery was abolished in 1865. The Quakers and others who began in the 1600s and the 1700s to produce speeches and pamphlets condemning slavery didn't live long enough to see their goal achieved. Were they therefore wasting their time?

[Robocommie]

The first two cannot be considered socialist because they operate within market economies.

I would argue that a socialist economy can be operated successfully, and equitably, while making use of certain market structures.

[Robocommie]

Here's something to think about. In the U.S. slavery was abolished in 1865. The Quakers and others who began in the 1600s and the 1700s to produce speeches and pamphlets condemning slavery didn't live long enough to see their goal achieved. Were they therefore wasting their time?

I like that. That's actually an encouraging way of thinking about it, thanks.