Post AsnKeRKOLViDLHjVoW by Sovereign_Beast@social.xenofem.me
(DIR) More posts by Sovereign_Beast@social.xenofem.me
(DIR) Post #AsnKanWHtYwV0jYoym by Sovereign_Beast@social.xenofem.me
2025-04-05T21:10:11.175126Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
You know, it strikes me that one of the weirdest elements of supply chain discourse is that every time it happens, it feels like the basic expectation that everyone brings is that self-organizing systems can't scale and that centrally managed systems are the baseline which everything else should be compared to.Meanwhile, in the real world, attempts to organize economic activity by a central management entity have all had significant problems at large scales, while the self-organizing economic framework of capitalism operates on a global scale.It'd be one thing if this was just, like, a state communism vs anarchism thing, but it's not; liberals and even some anarchists presume that centrally managed economics are the baseline, and that self-organization hasn't been proved at scale.I mean, like, I don't want to imply that capitalism and the market economy is an ideal system here, but people do realize that supply chains and stuff are an emergent characteristic of business relations and not, idk, created by Supply Chain Steve, the Guy Who Creates And Manages All Supply Chains, right? We know that self organizing systems can operate at a global scale because the current hegemonic system, operating on a global scale, is self-organizing.
(DIR) Post #AsnKavMejFzXLB7F4q by Sovereign_Beast@social.xenofem.me
2025-04-05T21:40:48.352249Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Like I guess you could argue that the capitalists organize the workers, and there can be some truth to that, but how do capitalists organize among themselves? Generally, it's by contracts, agreements, and other such means- meaning that b2b relations are not the result of companies being 'managed' into a supply chain, but are instead the result of those business actively self-organizing, with the 'supply chain' being a product of that self-organization.
(DIR) Post #AsnKd0kBhOSqbW7MAK by kittenlikeasmallcat@social.xenofem.me
2025-04-05T21:41:19.280409Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@Sovereign_Beast People who think the "invisible hand" metaphor and its descendants are real, reliable mechanisms and not pretend spectres partially intended to lampoon the absurdity of centrally and hierarchically organized systems have not read the source material, which is itself pretty fuckin wonky.
(DIR) Post #AsnKd1gKDEy7VpJmme by rowb1t@social.xenofem.me
2025-04-05T22:13:23.788507Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@kittenlikeasmallcat @Sovereign_Beast wasn't Smith's "invisible hand" literally god lmao?
(DIR) Post #AsnKeRKOLViDLHjVoW by Sovereign_Beast@social.xenofem.me
2025-04-05T22:21:41.758710Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@rowb1t @kittenlikeasmallcat IIRC it was 'providence' or something but yeah, Smith argued that even though the petit-boug were motivated by profits and self-interest, their actions still serve to benefit the common good 'as if they were guided by an invisible hand' been quite a while since I read the wealth of nations, though. It was a funny read tbf so I remember several tidbits- particularly that it's pretty much exclusively advocating for the petit rather than the grand bourgeoisie, and has an entire segment calling landlords in particular (and all who 'draw rent' from the work of others without participating in labor themselves in general) parasites.