Is capitalism a special form of slavery?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
fee.org/articles/young-people-reject-capitalism-in-name-socialism-in-fact/

Millennials Reject Capitalism in Name – but Socialism in Fact
Terminology Confuses Real Preferences
B.K. Marcus

excerpt:

“In an apparent rejection of the basic principles of the US economy,” writes Max Ehrenfreund at the Washington Post, “a new poll shows that most young people do not support capitalism.”

Notice the intimation that capitalism is the system we already have — not, as pro-capitalist philosopher Ayn Rand called it, the “unknown ideal.” But Ehrenfreund takes a half step back from the implication: “Capitalism can mean different things to different people.” Nevertheless, he concludes, “the newest generation of voters is frustrated with the status quo, broadly speaking.”

So we’re not entirely sure what “capitalism” means to those surveyed, but we think it has something to do with the system we currently live in. Young dissatisfaction with the status quo is probably a good thing, but the labels used in simplistic survey questions — and in headlines — just add ever more confusion to discussions of economic freedom.

As I wrote about my anti-capitalistic youth in “Why Students Give Capitalism an F,”

“Capitalism” was just the word we all used for whatever we didn’t like about the status quo, especially whatever struck us as promoting inequality. I had friends propose to me that we should consider the C-word a catchall for racism, patriarchy, and crony corporatism. If that’s what capitalism means, how could anyone be for it?

But even advocates of economic freedom are divided on the word capitalism. Some see it as the correct name for the system we support, including individual liberty, private property, and peaceful exchange. Of particular significance to Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, the term “refers to the most characteristic feature of the system, its main eminence, viz., the role the notion of capital plays in its conduct” (Human Action, chapter 13).

In other words, the profound abundance that the market has produced for all of us is the result of private investment and economic calculation.

Others point out that the term was coined by the enemies of the free market, and that it has too long a history as the designation for cozy business-government partnerships and legal privilege for the rich and powerful. (See FEE contributor Steven Horwitz’s “Is the Name ‘Capitalism’ Worth Keeping?”)
 
When multinational corporations take over the world, as they are bound to do given their rapid growth the past several decades, things will resemble socialism and it is bound to succeed!
And yet the greatest economic growth takes place in very small business.

Even in micro-business.
 
And yet the greatest economic growth takes place in very small business.

Even in micro-business.
Yes, there’s a lot of economic growth there, but very little resources for the power and control necessary for running the world.
 
Yes, there’s a lot of economic growth there, but very little resources for the power and control necessary for running the world.
One of the reasons for preferring a constitutional republic, which is the form of government under which the United States operates, is that you don’t need power and control for running the world.

We have a built-in checks and balances … whereby the legislative branch, the executive branch and the judicial branch balance one another.

And within each branch, there are further checks and balances. So the jurisdiction of the judicial branch is determined by the legislative branch, as an example. The legislative branch is chosen by the people in frequent elections. The Senate is supposed to be chosen by the state legislatures, but that got changed to direct election. [We already have a legislative house that is directly elected … the House of Representatives.]

The executive branch is controlled by the legislative branch. “Advice and consent” and by the budgeting and appropriation systems of the legislative branch.]

That ways everybody is keeping an eye on everybody else.
 
One of the reasons for preferring a constitutional republic, which is the form of government under which the United States operates, is that you don’t need power and control for running the world.

We have a built-in checks and balances … whereby the legislative branch, the executive branch and the judicial branch balance one another.

And within each branch, there are further checks and balances. So the jurisdiction of the judicial branch is determined by the legislative branch, as an example. The legislative branch is chosen by the people in frequent elections. The Senate is supposed to be chosen by the state legislatures, but that got changed to direct election. [We already have a legislative house that is directly elected … the House of Representatives.]

The executive branch is controlled by the legislative branch. “Advice and consent” and by the budgeting and appropriation systems of the legislative branch.]

That ways everybody is keeping an eye on everybody else.
I’m thinking into the future with my posts. In about 100 years or so, I foresee a world government, with a relatively few number of people with all the capital calling all the shoots, with international think tanks of social psychologists, economists, theologians… and so on, advising them.
 
I’m thinking into the future with my posts. In about 100 years or so, I foresee a world government, with a relatively few number of people with all the capital calling all the shoots, with international think tanks of social psychologists, economists, theologians… and so on, advising them.
How is that reminiscent of socialism? If socialism were achieved it would prevent that kind of thing from ever happening. If the means of production were all owned in common and controlled democratically, it would be impossible for an oligarchy like that to develop.
 
How is that reminiscent of socialism? If socialism were achieved it would prevent that kind of thing from ever happening. If the means of production were all owned in common and controlled democratically, it would be impossible for an oligarchy like that to develop.
Democracy and true socialism cannot operate without disaster. We need professionals in specialized fields recommending public policy, something that 99% of the population knows nothing about. For example, what does the general public know about the issues surrounding the legalization of marijuana? Such policies should not be democratic, involving mostly people knowing so little about it, but by professionals who can pretty well predict whether or not it should be legalized.
 
All variations of socialism have always failed and have always provided poorer results than a republic with free market economics and capitalism .

Socialism always has deteriorated into anarchy and into totalitarianism and into poverty and chaos.

No matter what the intentions are.

No matter how hard they try.

It’s always anarchy, totalitarianism, poverty and chaos.

Take a look at Venezuela today.

This is what works and is what the people gravitate towards:

online.hillsdale.edu/course/con101/schedule
 
Anarchy and totalitarianism are mutually exclusive.

While I sympathize with the desires of socialists, there is no doubt that the dreams are impossible. Socialism requires mass altruism, something that should never be depended upon; while capitalism is self checking.

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” benefits only those of zero ability and high need. And who defines the needs?

ICXC NIKA
 
Democracy and true socialism cannot operate without disaster. We need professionals in specialized fields recommending public policy, something that 99% of the population knows nothing about. For example, what does the general public know about the issues surrounding the legalization of marijuana? Such policies should not be democratic, involving mostly people knowing so little about it, but by professionals who can pretty well predict whether or not it should be legalized.
This elitism ideology has brought us abortion on demand, gay marriage and, coming soon, men in women’s bathrooms. I think the 99% do more often get it than not.
 
Democracy and true socialism cannot operate without disaster. We need professionals in specialized fields recommending public policy, something that 99% of the population knows nothing about. For example, what does the general public know about the issues surrounding the legalization of marijuana? Such policies should not be democratic, involving mostly people knowing so little about it, but by professionals who can pretty well predict whether or not it should be legalized.
Socialism puts all the power into the hands of the bureaucrats.

But they are worse at decision making than the first hundred people in the phone book.

The alleged professionals fail continuously and unremittingly at making decisions.

It goes on all the time.

The professional decision makers are unable to make good decisions.

Take a look at the 200 countries in the world as ranked by economic freedom.

The decentralized countries do better than the socialist countries.

Capitalism works where ever it is tried.

Socialism fails every time it is tried.

Maybe some people don’t like it that way, but that is the way it works in real life.
 
Socialism puts all the power into the hands of the bureaucrats.

But they are worse at decision making than the first hundred people in the phone book.

The alleged professionals fail continuously and unremittingly at making decisions.

It goes on all the time.

The professional decision makers are unable to make good decisions.

Take a look at the 200 countries in the world as ranked by economic freedom.

The decentralized countries do better than the socialist countries.

Capitalism works where ever it is tried.

Socialism fails every time it is tried.

Maybe some people don’t like it that way, but that is the way it works in real life.
My concern is humanitarian to eliminate poverty and to reduce the large amounts aggression/violence in society. How this is achieved matters little to me. Again, I think I can see where multi national corporations can make this happen.
 
I’m thinking into the future with my posts. In about 100 years or so, I foresee a world government, with a relatively few number of people with all the capital calling all the shoots, with international think tanks of social psychologists, economists, theologians… and so on, advising them.
Scary thought, but I think you are probably right. It’s already happening.
 
My concern is humanitarian to eliminate poverty and to reduce the large amounts aggression/violence in society. How this is achieved matters little to me. Again, I think I can see where multi national corporations can make this happen.
It’s being tried even as we speak.

And it’s failing continuously.

gfmag.com/global-data/economic-data/economic-freedom-by-country?page=2

cato.org/economic-freedom-world

cato.org/human-freedom-index

Bureaucratic systems fail.
 
I’m not sure, but sometimes endless topics on capitalism feel like a special form of slavery.
 
Nobody forces you to read them. Why do you let yourself get enslaved in them?
If was responding seriously, or this wasn’t a typical Robert Sock topic, I’d probably give you a semi-decent answer.

But what’s the point, when neither my response nor most of his topics are to be taken too seriously?
 
If was responding seriously, or this wasn’t a typical Robert Sock topic, I’d probably give you a semi-decent answer.

But what’s the point, when neither my response nor most of his topics are to be taken too seriously?
Sounds like you want to harass, for reasons I do not know! It’s not the Christian way to behave. Nobody forces you to read my posts, but your reply sounds intentionally slanderous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top