All of these hot takes about how Mastodon is too hard to use for mass adoption are missing the point entirely. We are not some tech startup trying to "disrupt" the social media ecosystem. We don't have VCs breathing down our necks pushing for continuous growth at all costs. We're just regular people out here building communities.

If people don't like Mastodon and decide to go back to Twitter, that's fine. They are not commodities to be exploited. If people like Mastodon and decide to stay, that's great! They are going to be more invested in the community because they are actually deriving real value from it.

If there's one thing the global capitalist system cannot fathom is that value can exist that is not fungible with monetary value. There are plenty of ways to create value for people that do not involve buying and selling. In fact the whole notion that value = monetary value is a relatively recent innovation in human history.

I'm not saying that capitalism doesn't have its benefits, but our minds have become so warped by its zero-sum game vision of the world that it's easy to believe that generating profits is the only thing that matters. We may have to play that game to justify our existence on this planet, but there's a whole world of value to be found outside of it. Just because we're forced to play the game doesn't mean the game is all there is.

@theropologist I feel we are on similar moods today, you're just much more eloquent than I lol
@theropologist I love that I've been able to connect with so many people. This site was very hard when I started using it, but because I liked it, I stayed and learned how to use it. There's google and people on here who will help you.
@godlesswh_re That's a great point too. If people see value in something they are willing to put effort into it. The whole notion that something needs to be effortless to have any value is basically a marketing ploy, tricking people into using your product because it's easy and they don't even have to think about it. Then all that's left to do is making monetization equally seamless and now you have a money spigot. That's value generation through exploitation rather than engagement.
@theropologist @godlesswh_re I can eat spaghetti from a can, and it's easy, but that doesn't make it worthwhile or nourishing.
@RickiTarr
I am so here for the allegory of traditional social media being a sad millennial eating spaghetti out of a can and fediverse being some kind of wholesome home cooked meal.
@theropologist @godlesswh_re

@Arrakis_Surfer @RickiTarr @theropologist @godlesswh_re how about instead of fine dining (elitist, expensive, exclusionary) consider 'well made home cooked meal'.

Mastodon is comfortable, it's community, it's shared values, it's warmth, it's nourishing. It took some time and a little know how.

@RickiTarr @theropologist @godlesswh_re

It's the same calorific value, but a very different flavour of experience. :D

@theropologist Exactly. If thar keeps them away, then they were never really interested in being here. One of the benefits of being on here is that people aren't being harassed.
@godlesswh_re @theropologist
Actually I think for me that one is most of the benefits, and covers each and every other benefit, e.g. being able to ditch the fucked up euphemisms because there's no algorithm harassing us either. <3

@theropologist @godlesswh_re I ran into this when demoing mission critical software to a few future operators of said software. They didn't grasp parts of the UX intuitively and I was apologetic. They replied they liked the UX once explained and that familiarization was what training was for.

I hadn't even realized how much I'd internalized this idea of mandatory intuitiveness.

@theropologist
My invaluable value (and why I'm here 🦣 and not there 🐦):
Peace of mind 😌
@DanielleBastian @theropologist I'd go one step further and say sanity! I have seen lots of discussions here by people who disagree with each other, but not one petty squabble, just discussions.
@Harryshelper @DanielleBastian @theropologist So true. It’s like the early days of Twitter. I hope it stays this way.

@theropologist Do you want a free press that's not owned outright by oligarchs and their toadies?

Then we need to build it ourselves and use software like Mastodon to promote that work. Because the oligarchs have built a media cartel and we ain't in it.

@ParanoidFactoid @theropologist this is why I love @igd_news & @UnicornRiot

But I am curious what some of the benefits you see capitalism having are (@theropologist)

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot Hey, I will respond here with something real. But my kid got sick. Give me a few.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

1.

I promised to respond to this question. But it's going to take a thread. So here we go.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

2.

You asked, 'what benefits do I see of capitalism?'

To respond, I'd like to first untangle base definitions. Because we are far removed from the origins of Enlightenment liberalism, which is the foundation of capitalism as an ideological force.

To do that though, rather than compare the differences between capitalism, socialism, and marxism, let's instead ask: what are the similarities?

(uh oh) lol

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

3.

Today, the differences seem maximal. That is, capitalism is on one end of an economic spectrum and marxism on the other.

(let's assume, marxism is to the left and capitalism is to the right on this theoretical scale)

This view - maximal difference - is incompatible with early views on economics and society back in the 18th-19th century.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

4.

Let's use Labor Theory of Value as an example. This is typically ascribed to Marx. But actually, it was originally delineated by Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations. Then David Ricardo expanded on that. Both of these, some eighty years before Marx.

Which means - and this should not surprise - Marx was well read in the economic literature of that time and used their ideas to further his own.

(like a scholar would)

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

5.

What Marx did to Smith and Ricardo's work was to shift to focus on the profiteering by owners to that of loss by workers.

Smith and Ricardo liked profit. Marx, not so much. But Marx took from Smith and Ricardo the idea Labor Theory of Value and then inverted its presumption (or focus). But the theory is the same.

It's also important to understand the difference between Marx-Engles Marxism vs Leninist State Marxism.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

6.

Marx & Engles were much more aligned with today's anarchist movement than they would be with centralized state communism. Because they viewed the state as a tyrannical instrument of centralized and disconnected power.

Honestly, much like how libertarians and anarchists view the state today.

Marx wanted wanted a kind of federated and decentralized society, with workers owning industrial facilities run as nonprofit COOPs.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

7.

But this is in direct contradiction to Leninist thought, which then led to Stalinism and Maoism (the vestiges of which we still see in today's China).

So, with this context, let's ask, what does Left and Right actually mean in relation to Marx-Engles' vision vs Lenin/Stalin/Mao? And how does that comport to the modern vision of these ideologies?

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

8.

So we know the terms Left and Right come from the French Revolution. That is, during the conflict (but while King Louis XVI still sat on the throne), those who argued for the interests of peasants would sit to the left at the Estates Generale (Parliament). Those who supported the Church, sat in the middle. And those who supported the King, sat to the RIGHT!

The right has at its foundation a support of centralized monarchy. (Edmund Burke)

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

9.

And the Left supported average downtrodden people who'd been fucked over by the monarchy and their abuse of state power.

OK?

So, how do we align capitalism, communism, and socialism to this vision of Left vs Right?

Marx-Engles would be to the left! (they didn't like centralized government) But state communism is to the right (because it's centralized government).

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

10.

Whereas capitalism (as practiced in the 18th-19th century) is actually to the left, because it decentralized economies and financial power away from the monarchy and ceded it to average people.

Socialism is a curious matter. Because EVERYONE has stolen that term for themselves.

Marx, Lenin, Hitler, even capitalists! They all stole the word Socialism as a kind of fake alternative to communism.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

11.

But, let's critique capitalism now.

Adam Smith understood that in a liberal society, capital would accumulate into fewer and fewer hands until those last few who remained owners would essentially become royalty themselves. And as a result, workers would be reduced to wage slavery.

He wrote about that in Wealth of Nations. See Book 1, chapter 8.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

12.

There, he argued that capitalists (the ownership class, who back then were called Masters), would drive the populace to a point of desperation and lead to the collapse of the state. (which he opposed)

His solution to that was "trade unions", which today we'd call a labor union.

Adam Smith argued that labor unions were a necessary countervailing force to capitalism, otherwise mercantile kings would form (and steal the official throne).

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

13.

But he wasn't particularly happy about the monarchy either (though he had to be a toady there, as being too outspoken may well have gotten him jailed).

If you read his book, Theory of Moral Sentiments, you will find a harsh critique of the aristocracy. Those Marxists here who've read Veblen and his book, Theory of the Leisure Class, will immediately recognize similar arguments (made a hundred and fiftyish years prior).

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

14.

OOOOOOKKKKKKK.... let's draw some comparisons.

State Communism is more like Royalty than it is like French republicanism (traditional leftism). That's going to be a hard one to swallow for many people here.

But think about it. Leninism came from the overthrow of the Czars. They had a huge country to suddenly govern. And fucking civil war to boot. What else could they have done but recreate Czarist Russia with a Marxist face?

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

15.

Mao just copied it. He and Stalin actually liked each other. They had a good personal relationship. And Mao invited in a great number of advisors and engineers from the Soviet Union to help industrialize China. They especially needed STEEL. So Russia help them build foundries.

That collapsed when Stalin died. Mao and Khrushchev did not get along and Mao kicked out all the Soviet advisors after Stalin's death.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

16.

Mao's Great Leap Forward was an attempt to resolve the loss of Soviet advisors. But you'll note, he used the ideas of Lysenko in agriculture, with famine and other devastating consequences the result.

This brings up how ideology - like a mind virus - strips us of the intellectual tools needed to untangle when ideas stray from physical reality.

Lysenko is a perfect example of state communism going crazy.

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

17.

So let's contrast that with today's capitalist oligarchs.

Remember I said Smith argued that indefinite accumulation of capital would lead to a new royalty class. Well what the fuck do we think these assholes are trying to do? Whether that's Putin, or Xi Jing Ping, or Kim Jong Un, etc.

Remember how Trump aspired to be like them? And if you look at his Manhattan flat in Trump tower, what does it look like?

@currentbias @theropologist @igd_news @UnicornRiot

18.

What does that remind you of? Well, here's Napoleon's flat, recreated in the Louvre Museum in Paris, France.

@currentbias Oh I am not trying to defend capitalism as a system, I was more trying to play devil's advocate. Like it or not, capitalism is the current global hegemonic power structure. We might be stuck in a dehumanizing system that turns exploitation into a virtue, but that doesn't mean that system is the only means we have of creating value for one another.

The articles I read irritated me because they basically were saying that Mastodon was a failure if it couldn't be the new Twitter even though Mastodon isn't trying to be the new Twitter. Mastodon is its own thing and it should be judged on its own merits.

@theropologist [standing] 👏👏👏👏👏👏
@theropologist
I've been here about 3 months. This post describes what I love about Mastodon. It feels like being at a big gathering milling around talking to people.
@theropologist offering a platform that‘s accessible and easy to use isn’t something you have to articulate in business terms.

@lokshin That's my main gripe about the articles measuring the utility of Mastodon in business terms. It's not a business. It's a way to build communities without treating them like a commodity.

I totally agree that it could be easier to use and there are friction points that make it difficult for people to get started. At the same time some of those friction points involve learning about what makes Mastodon different from Twitter. If people are expecting it to be just like Twitter but minus all the things they don't like about Twitter, they're going to be disappointed.

@theropologist
Thing is - the value of Twitter is people. And the value of Mastodon is people. Nothing else really matters - for either.
Growth - of people - is good, because volume increases the chances of finding simpatico correspondents. And, quite a few of the people I'd like to come over, don't need barriers to entry.
@strum @theropologist No, the value of Twitter WAS people. Once you get to the "monetization" stage that ends though.

@strum I agree that Mastodon should be easier to use for first time users. And I think growth is good, because it makes the community better, not so that Mastodon can be "winning" at the daily active users metric.

At the same time I think a lot of the perceived barriers to entry come from lazy journalists complaining about how Mastodon is too hard to use when they haven't even really tried to understand what Mastodon is, beyond just a Twitter clone (which it is not). Really, if you can understand email, federation is not that difficult of a concept. It just takes a willingness to engage with new ideas.

@theropologist @strum this is also not to say that we can’t make the experience better for people anyway. Friction is bad. If it’s hard to get started with mastodon and find value in it, we should make it easier. (My first contribution to this was writing an intro guide for common gotchas: https://fields.medium.com/a-brief-introduction-to-mastodon-587f36b6ba20 )
A brief introduction to Mastodon - Adam Fields - Medium

This is adapted from a presentation I gave to a few people, and my main takeaway from that is that there are some confusing differences between how Twitter works and how Mastodon works. This is my…

Medium
@theropologist And it's a game created by humans, it's not a law of nature. We made the rules, we can change the rules... any time we want. #abetterworld #abetterfuture It's up to us!
@theropologist There needs to be a way for people to respond to postings in their repostings, ala Twitter and Post.News.

@theropologist I want people to leave Twitter. I don’t care if they come to Mastodon or just stop using social media. It’s more dangerous than other right wing sites due to a legacy air of legitimacy, and the continued presence of people and organizations that wouldn’t have been on those other sites.

I’d prefer the barrier to entry here to be the rules and moderation rather than a convoluted signup process. I can’t imagine that exploits people more than remaining on Twitter does.