this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2025
11 points (92.3% liked)

askchapo

23237 readers
152 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/39877392

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] happybadger@hexbear.net 9 points 3 months ago

Competition is a good thing when it's ultimately collaborative. If a hunter-gatherer competes with other hunters for the kill, they drive each other to succeed while feeding their tribe all the same. I have competitions with my coworkers to design garden beds, and the result is four thoughtful designs instead of one design by committee. We all work hard toward implementing the winner's design because we all agree with their value system.

[–] hellinkilla@hexbear.net 6 points 3 months ago

what do you mean by "competition"? I think the word has one meaning when used in a general sense, like "my sister and I are very competitive" or biggest pumpkin competition. But when used in the context of discussing capitalism it turns into something else, something amorphous and euphemistic. Probably Marx explained it. Competition in capitalism has to do with rates of profit. It hides collusion, and explains increasing exploitation.

The former, yes that would always exist. The latter, is highly contextual and cannot exist without the context.

P.S. Here's the on-hexbear link to your crosspost: https://hexbear.net/post/6942725

[–] Dort_Owl@hexbear.net 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Two aspects of animal life impressed me most during the journeys which I made in my youth in Eastern Siberia and Northern Manchuria. One of them was the extreme severity of the struggle for existence which most species of animals have to carry on against an inclement Nature; the enormous destruction of life which periodically results from natural agencies; and the consequent paucity of life over the vast territory which fell under my observation. And the other was, that even in those few spots where animal life teemed in abundance, I failed to find — although I was eagerly looking for it — that bitter struggle for the means of existence, among animals belonging to the same species, which was considered by most Darwinists (though not always by Darwin himself) as the dominant characteristic of struggle for life, and the main factor of evolution.

The terrible snow-storms which sweep over the northern portion of Eurasia in the later part of the winter, and the glazed frost that often follows them; the frosts and the snow-storms which return every year in the second half of May, when the trees are already in full blossom and insect life swarms everywhere; the early frosts and, occasionally, the heavy snowfalls in July and August, which suddenly destroy myriads of insects, as well as the second broods of the birds in the prairies; the torrential rains, due to the monsoons, which fall in more temperate regions in August and September — resulting in inundations on a scale which is only known in America and in Eastern Asia, and swamping, on the plateaus, areas as wide as European States; and finally, the heavy snowfalls, early in October, which eventually render a territory as large as France and Germany, absolutely impracticable for ruminants, and destroy them by the thousand — these were the conditions under which I saw animal life struggling in Northern Asia. They made me realize at an early date the overwhelming importance in Nature of what Darwin described as “the natural checks to over-multiplication,” in comparison to the struggle between individuals of the same species for the means of subsistence, which may go on here and there, to some limited extent, but never attains the importance of the former. Paucity of life, under-population — not over-population — being the distinctive feature of that immense part of the globe which we name Northern Asia, I conceived since then serious doubts — which subsequent study has only confirmed — as to the reality of that fearful competition for food and life within each species, which was an article of faith with most Darwinists, and, consequently, as to the dominant part which this sort of competition was supposed to play in the evolution of new species.

On the other hand, wherever I saw animal life in abundance, as, for instance, on the lakes where scores of species and millions of individuals came together to rear their progeny; in the colonies of rodents; in the migrations of birds which took place at that time on a truly American scale along the Usuri; and especially in a migration of fallow-deer which I witnessed on the Amur, and during which scores of thousands of these intelligent animals came together from an immense territory, flying before the coming deep snow, in order to cross the Amur where it is narrowest — in all these scenes of animal life which passed before my eyes, I saw Mutual Aid and Mutual Support carried on to an extent which made me suspect in it a feature of the greatest importance for the maintenance of life, the preservation of each species, and its further evolution.

[–] Johnny_Arson@hexbear.net 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

One of my favorite books!

Assuming this is Kropotkin. It's been ages since I read it.

[–] Dort_Owl@hexbear.net 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Corrrrrrrrrect! It's just the first few paragraphs of Mutual Aid. But it's such a good start and lays out the foundation for his rationale so well.

[–] RedWizard@hexbear.net 2 points 3 months ago

I really should give this a read soon.