Why I love Capitalism

[Don Roley]

Capitalism has been run down a lot. It is easy to take a shallow view of it and blame it for the troubles of the world. But I see no other system that is as fair as it is. There are problems with everything- most of which goes back to human nature.

But what other system has as it's fundemental core the idea that one man does not own another?

Yes, cultures that have called themselves capitalist have had slaves. That is a let down of the principal and capitalist countries are not the only one that have had slavery.

You can have a society that is capitalist without slavery. Indeed I would say that it is not a true capitalist society unless all men are free. But no other system other than capitalism preaches that no one should have control over another's wealth or the product of his mind and/or labor.

I am not against doing good for your fellow man. In fact I encourage it. I am against forcing people to do "good" for their "fellow man." Capitalism does not prevent anyone from giving their wealth to another. It merely states that no person can come along and take it with some self- rightous excuse. You want to help people- great! We will not stop you. But if you want someone else to be forced to help others, then you do not respect their right to make decisions and are treating them like a slave.

Some people have taken the task that there are some great threats to us all that force us to limit the freedoms of capitalism. That scare tactic has been used by every tyranny since they started recording those types of things. The same people I see protesting (rightly) any move to limit our freedom of speech in the name of fighting terrorism will then turn around and say that we all must be forced to sacrifice what we have to save humanity.

Part of the problem is that when people really do have a threat like that, some parts are sacrificed to save the group. Who does the choosing? I admire people who would sacrifice for others. But when a mob comes to my door saying that I have been choosen as the sacrifice.....

Again, others can sacrifice themselves for the greater good. They can't morally force others to sacrifice for them.

So, can anyone else point out any other system that treats people as anything other than as a slave to be sacrificed if needed with the excuse of it being "for the greater good"?

 

[Makalakumu]

I guess my biggest objection is the "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" part of capitalism. There is more to life then that...and as soon as one accepts that, really accepts that, then conflict emerges. Naturally.

 

[Don Roley]

I guess my biggest objection is the "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" part of capitalism. There is more to life then that...and as soon as one accepts that, really accepts that, then conflict emerges. Naturally.

There is no "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" part of capitalism. No man is allowed to infringe upon the rights of others. I can sell to you, you can buy from me but I can't take something from you by force or fraud.

And if you are saying that there is more than living for oneself, show me what else there is. That belief is rather akin to relgion. You are allowed to believe what you want and live in that manner. But you are not allowed to force others to act in a way your religious belief says is correct.

Again, in a captialist country you are allowed to devote your life to what you believe is the 'much more'. You can help people if you want. But you can't force others. Others systems that make you devote your life to the 'much more' do not allow people to disagree and live differently.

 

[Tgace]

The "problem" with capitolism is exactly the fact that you cant force other people to do what you want...many people with agendas (social, ecological, political) dont like that.

 

[Makalakumu]

The "problem" with capitolism is exactly the fact that you cant force other people to do what you want...many people with agendas (social, ecological, political) dont like that.

But people are forced into certain decisions in this country all of the time. We have laws and I'm sure you are familiar with some of those. Unfettered capitalism is "dog eat dog", "winner take all". You are collapsing concepts that do not dovetail.

The nature of capitalism is "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". You should hear the people at the Cato institute drone on about it. When everything in life is reduced to a unit of commerace, how can it be any different?

Believe what you want, but I reject that idea. I am more then a dollar sign...and I think that many out there share that belief. Thus democracy and capitalism work at cross purposes.

btw - the agenda thing is tiring. This little discussion is not even a blip in our countries political consciousness. If a person had an "agenda" there are much better arenas to forward it.

 

[Makalakumu]

There is no "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" part of capitalism. No man is allowed to infringe upon the rights of others. I can sell to you, you can buy from me but I can't take something from you by force or fraud.

What "rights" are supposedly part of capitalism? When everything is a unit of commerace, one is allowed to take anything they want provided they have enough energy (money) to obtain it.

Thus my usage of satanic law (do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law) to describe capitalism is apropriate. Capitalism is ultimately about gratifying the needs of the self, nothing more.

"A path to the dark side it is..."

 

[Don Roley]

The nature of capitalism is "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law".

Nope.

What you write about is mainly not capitalism. Adam Smith did not say that there was no use for goverment. Libertarism says that. Capitalists say that the goverment should not be involved in the redistribution of wealth and anything that the goverment need not do it should not do.

What "rights" are supposedly part of capitalism? When everything is a unit of commerace, one is allowed to take anything they want provided they have enough energy (money) to obtain it.

The right to say yes or no is the basic right of capitalism. People CAN buy anything they want IF the other person is willing to sell it to them. No one can FORCE someone to sell to another.

 

[Makalakumu]

The will of the self is gratified in capitalism. Only the self. I, personally, have a problem with this, because I tend to be more selfless.

Liberty is liberation. It is illumination of the self. Libertarians have a political position that most closely adheres to the nature of capitalism.

When everything is reduced to a unit of commerace, the will of the self is gratified when one has the energy to obtain their desires. Someone may refuse to "sell" something for what ever reason...and that only drives up the price until someone capitulates to the needs of their self.

Thus we see the race to the lowest and most base human instincts that is inherit in capitalism. Everything is for sale and anything one wants to do is possible provided they have enough energy.

btw - I realize I am making an argument against freedom...yet, I am not alone. Why do you think that so many religions concern themselves with restricting freedom? The simple answer is that many view the gratification of the self above all else to be evil.

I tend to agree.

 

[Don Roley]

The will of the self is gratified in capitalism. Only the self. I, personally, have a problem with this, because I tend to be more selfless.

Liberty is liberation. It is illumination of the self. Libertarians have a political position that most closely adheres to the nature of capitalism.

When everything is reduced to a unit of commerace, the will of the self is gratified when one has the energy to obtain their desires. Someone may refuse to "sell" something for what ever reason...and that only drives up the price until someone capitulates to the needs of their self.

Thus we see the race to the lowest and most base human instincts that is inherit in capitalism. Everything is for sale and anything one wants to do is possible provided they have enough energy.

I can't help you if you feel that humans are so base as to be for sale to do anything once a certain price is reached. If you feel you would kill your children for money, then I am sad for you as a human. Fortunatly, the center point of capitalism is that your right to swing ends at another persons nose and so your children are safe under the law of a capitalistic goverment.

However, if you think that humans can be so corrupted, then you can't in good faith support any type of system that would put control of other people's wealth since the corruption would set in with those folks as well. In fact, we can see this in all the goverments that are now set up for the betrement of their people's like North Korea and Zimbabwe.

btw - I realize I am making an argument against freedom...yet, I am not alone. Why do you think that so many religions concern themselves with restricting freedom? The simple answer is that many view the gratification of the self above all else to be evil.

I tend to agree.

You are free to hold religious views under a capitalist system. You are not allowed to force those belief's on others. Your feeling that there is a greater purpose is one that can't be proven and some find rather silly. No one can use force to stop you from acting in a way that causes them no direct harm in a capitalist society. But if religious views are forced on others because of the greatness of their "truth" then we are right back to the Taliban or other great disasters in history.

 

[Makalakumu]

I can't help you if you feel that humans are so base as to be for sale to do anything once a certain price is reached. If you feel you would kill your children for money, then I am sad for you as a human.

I would not harm my children for any amount of anything. Someone else may. The gratification of their self leads to this act. THAT is capitalism. I'm glad I live in a place that bans this transaction...limits capitalism.

Fortunatly, the center point of capitalism is that your right to swing ends at another persons nose and so your children are safe under the law of a capitalistic goverment.

That is not capitalism at all. That is your belief in what is right and wrong. Capitalism is ammoral in the sense that nothing is right or wrong. Everything is a unit of commerace and you can obtain anything provided that you have the energy (money). Everything is for sale.

Capitalism will be the underlying system that delivers a nuclear bomb to Al-Qaeda. Someone will eventually sell the bastards a nuke when the price gets high enough and both parties will gratify selfish needs. Everything is for sale, even nukes that would be put to nefarious use.

However, if you think that humans can be so corrupted, then you can't in good faith support any type of system that would put control of other people's wealth since the corruption would set in with those folks as well. In fact, we can see this in all the goverments that are now set up for the betrement of their people's like North Korea and Zimbabwe.

True. Totalitarianism leads to many kinds of ugly things. So does capitalism. In fact, if one wishes to characterize the last century, I think that one could say that it was a struggle against the ugly things of totalitarianism. This century, I think, will be characterized by a struggle against the ugly things inherit in advanced capitalism.

You are free to hold religious views under a capitalist system. You are not allowed to force those belief's on others. Your feeling that there is a greater purpose is one that can't be proven and some find rather silly. No one can use force to stop you from acting in a way that causes them no direct harm in a capitalist society. But if religious views are forced on others because of the greatness of their "truth" then we are right back to the Taliban or other great disasters in history.

I still think that you are collapsing concepts that do not dovetail. Capitalism and democracy can work at cross purposes. We are a nation of laws and these laws are based on what the majority view as right and wrong. These concepts limit the transactions of capitalism. They limit the will of the self and that is anti-capitalistic.

Here is another way of thinking about what I'm trying to say...if you believe that everything is for sale, then you love capitalism. If you think that some things can never be "sold" then you do not love capitalism.

 

[Don Roley]

Capitalism is ammoral in the sense that nothing is right or wrong. Everything is a unit of commerace and you can obtain anything provided that you have the energy (money). Everything is for sale.

Have you ever read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith?

If so, can you show me the section in it that backs up your definition as posted above?

It sounds to me like you are making up things to fit your view of capitalism rather than what most of us know it to be. Your whole argument rests on the idea that capitalism is all about money, instead of the idea that it is a system that says that the goverment should not be in the business of distributing wealth.

So if you can go off and get that page number where Adam Smith says that nothing is right or wrong and everything is for sale I would appreciate it.

 

[Makalakumu]

Have you ever read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith?

If so, can you show me the section in it that backs up your definition as posted above?

It sounds to me like you are making up things to fit your view of capitalism rather than what most of us know it to be. Your whole argument rests on the idea that capitalism is all about money, instead of the idea that it is a system that says that the goverment should not be in the business of distributing wealth.

So if you can go off and get that page number where Adam Smith says that nothing is right or wrong and everything is for sale I would appreciate it.

Adam Smith isn't the only writer to break down capitalism. The stuff I'm talking about is mainstream. I'm taking a little from Smith, a little Marx and a little from Malthus, and a little from...

Capitalism is a system that reduces everything down to units of commerace and is fundemantally about gratifying the needs of the self.

Redistribution of wealth occurs in capitalism, by the way. The idea that the government should not redistribute wealth is really a very small piece in the puzzle...and very related to the gratification of selfish needs.

 

[Andrew Green]

Have you ever read The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith?

The original theory and reality are not always the same. Same with Marx and Communism

 

[Makalakumu]

The original theory and reality are not always the same. Same with Marx and Communism

Nicely Put!

 

[Dale Seago]

The will of the self is gratified in capitalism. Only the self. I, personally, have a problem with this, because I tend to be more selfless.

Which of course gives you the moral right to control everyone else's economic behavior. For the greater good of all, of course.

 

[Cryozombie]

I agree that something should be done...

If EVERYONE would send me all their money and assets, Im SURE I could find a fair way to redistribute it all.

He he he.

 

[Tgace]

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Politics/Articles/Capitalism/capit-2.htm

Freedom means the absence of physical force, including all forms of fraud. An individual is free when force is not being initiated against him, which means that there is only one source of unfreedom for any individual: other men. That is, a man's freedom can only be infringed upon when another person or group of persons initiates the use of physical force against him. The fact that an individual is unfit to run a mile in under four minutes or too poor to buy food is not a violation of his freedom. Why? Because in both of these cases no one is forcibly stopping the individual from attaining his ends. However, the fact that an individual cannot start his own electric company is a violation of his freedom. Why? Because in this case his actions are impeded by the use of force -- the government's legal monopoly on utility companies prevents him from starting his own electric company through the threat of force. Freedom is only a negative, it imposes no positive constraints on other people's actions. In a free (or capitalist) society all men may act as they choose as so long as they do not infringe on the freedom of others -- by violating their rights through force. Subsequently, it is only a government limited to protecting individual rights that fails to violate the freedom its citizens. Since capitalism upholds individual rights as absolutes, capitalism upholds freedom as absolute.

All non-capitalistic societies force some men to live at the expense of others. Whether you are forced to live, in part or in whole, for the sake of God (as in a theocracy), "the underprivileged" (as in the welfare state), or the latest sadist in power (as in a dictatorship) does not matter, it is only the fact that some individuals are violating the freedom of others, not the method by which they do it, that matters.

 

[Don Roley]

Adam Smith isn't the only writer to break down capitalism. The stuff I'm talking about is mainstream. I'm taking a little from Smith, a little Marx and a little from Malthus, and a little from...

In short, you made up your own definition of capitalism.

I see you mantion Marx, an enemy of capitalism in your source. But I doubt you can find any mainstream proponent of capitalism that would say that it is all about money and that there is no right or wrong as you say. Nor can you back up your argument with a logical train of thought.

Capitalism is about economic freedom for the individual. That does not mean that it is about seeking money as it's only purpose. TGace's quoted section is the better definition of what it is all about. It's purpose is not about the pursuit of money- but the freedom to do whatever you want as long as it has no negative impact on another.

 

[Makalakumu]

In short, you made up your own definition of capitalism.

No. It is an informed opinion. It is a distillation of the thoughts of many greater thinkers then myself. Unfettered capitalism reduces everything to units of commerace and prime motivator of the system is self gratification.

I see you mantion Marx, an enemy of capitalism in your source. But I doubt you can find any mainstream proponent of capitalism that would say that it is all about money and that there is no right or wrong as you say.

These criticisms of capitalism are hundreds of years old. They have been argued over by people much smarter then myself. They are mainstream. When I say that capitalism reduces what one wants to a unit of commerace, that is capitalism by definition. When I say that capitalism is driven by self-interest, again, that is by definition capitalism. The freedom to choose for yourself IS self interest. It IS self gratification.

Nor can you back up your argument with a logical train of thought.

That isn't fair. There is plenty of logic in what I have posted so far. Your disagreement doesn't make it illogical. Again, all of the stuff I've posted is well thought out, mainstream, and very scholastic. People have literally spent their lives studying this stuff and hammering out their arguments. Here is a website that is full of critiques that echo the things that I've said.

http://world.std.com/~mhuben/critcfm.html

Capitalism is about economic freedom for the individual.

In other words, self gratification through units of commerace.

That does not mean that it is about seeking money as it's only purpose.

True, but I think you are confused about a few things that I'm saying. Money is a proxy for energy in capitalistic systems. You obtain units of commerace by expending energy. One is not seeking money, one is seeking to fulfill their own self-interests. That requires energy (money) and it is the reason wealth accumulates.

TGace's quoted section is the better definition of what it is all about.

It says the same things that I'm saying, it just does it differently. It is just another opinion.

It's purpose is not about the pursuit of money- but the freedom to do whatever you want as long as it has no negative impact on another.

Capitalism makes no distinction between positive or negative impacts. The system is ammoral. In a purely capitalistic society where everything is traded and all needs of the self are gratified, anything goes.

If you wish to forbid negative impacts, then you are fettering the system and imposing your own moral point of view upon it. It is not pre-existing or self-evident in anyway.

Consequently, if you are forced to compete with someone who does not share your moral perspective and causing a negative impact gives them the upper hand in the competition, you and your moral point of view lose.

This is how basest in human behavior exhibits inself in advanced capitalistic societies. It is literally, a race to the bottom.

 

[Tgace]

"The socialist speaks of possibilities while the capitalist speaks of realities; however, when each is judged by its real world performance capitalism proves to be more productive of goods, services, and personal liberation. Capitalism succeeds because it is an economic theory designed for sinners just as socialism fails because it is a theory designed for saints. Capitalism is able to convert individuals' private ambitions into the creation and distribution of wealth so that everyone has a solid material base. Capitalism demands freedom in order to function and thus liberates those who live under it; socialism ostensibly supports such liberation but, in fact, requires sharp restrictions of freedom in order to function."

-MICHAEL NOVAK