3 ms·

The role of government should be a counterbalance to capitalism. Capitalism allows people to self motivate to get everything done. It does not really need any

The role of government should be a counterbalance to capitalism. Capitalism allows people to self motivate to get everything done. It does not really need any helping. Human aspirations is enough. Governments must protect the future resources our planet has. And do so in an even way which makes the playing field fair for companies. It's an almost impossible task & I can start to understand why we don't detect any intelligent life anywhere in the universe. Life anywhere is probably similar to ours: took millions of years to develop, collected lots of stored energy underground, and all the organisms are naturally competitive making it impossible for modern life on the planet to co-exist.

calibraxis 10y ago
Fortunately, capitalism is a fairly young system & requires a government to provide violence (police & military) to preserve it. Capitalists often ask government to step in and make capitalism viable long-term. That is, keep capitalists from destroying each other. And to keep the populace from trying alternatives. ("Revolution.") Slavery was more stable: lasted millenia. We're in turbulent times, particularly since we're probably ending neoliberal capitalism: an unstable form of capitalism whose one advantage is to damage the imagination enough to stop seeing alternatives except a single bad one.
- r00fus 10y ago
  I would be surprised if the death knell for neoliberal capitalism is really sounding. And what, pray tell, is the replacement? Fascism? Plutocracy? Probably not Socialism or Communism...
  - danharaj 10y ago
    Even the IMF's economists are starting to question neoliberalism's limitations: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/pdf/ostry.pdf https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/pdf/ostry... Lenin (for all his faults) said that fascism is capitalism in decay, and far-right governments are gaining power all over the world, so...
- GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
  >Slavery was more stable: lasted millenia. And slavery required less violence, per capita, to maintain? I don't think so. Innumerable slave revolts. Wars of conquest to capture slaves. Slave raiding. The daily violence needed to enforce slavery. Sexual violence perpetrated on slaves. Capitalism is a rock of stability, from a civil society perspective, in contrast. When was the last time a developed capitalist nation had a civil war, or even a major violent revolt?
  - finid 10y ago
    When was the last time a developed capitalist nation had a civil war, or even a major violent revolt? Reminder: Before those developed capitalist nations became what they are now, they also had their share of civil wars and major violent revolts.
    - GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
      Yes, and?
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    Oh boy, are you in for a big surprise.
  - 20after4 10y ago
    > When was the last time a developed capitalist nation had a civil war, or even a major violent revolt? Ask again in a year or two.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  I'm anticapitalist but your smug tone does nothing to advance the discussion or help people to find effective alternatives.
- afsina 10y ago
  Capitalism, as free markets are anti-state.

calibraxis 10y ago

Fortunately, capitalism is a fairly young system & requires a government to provide violence (police & military) to preserve it. Capitalists often ask government to step in and make capitalism viable long-term. That is, keep capitalists from destroying each other. And to keep the populace from trying alternatives. ("Revolution.") Slavery was more stable: lasted millenia. We're in turbulent times, particularly since we're probably ending neoliberal capitalism: an unstable form of capitalism whose one advantage is to damage the imagination enough to stop seeing alternatives except a single bad one.

r00fus 10y ago
I would be surprised if the death knell for neoliberal capitalism is really sounding. And what, pray tell, is the replacement? Fascism? Plutocracy? Probably not Socialism or Communism...
- danharaj 10y ago
  Even the IMF's economists are starting to question neoliberalism's limitations: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/pdf/ostry.pdf https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/pdf/ostry... Lenin (for all his faults) said that fascism is capitalism in decay, and far-right governments are gaining power all over the world, so...
GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
>Slavery was more stable: lasted millenia. And slavery required less violence, per capita, to maintain? I don't think so. Innumerable slave revolts. Wars of conquest to capture slaves. Slave raiding. The daily violence needed to enforce slavery. Sexual violence perpetrated on slaves. Capitalism is a rock of stability, from a civil society perspective, in contrast. When was the last time a developed capitalist nation had a civil war, or even a major violent revolt?
- finid 10y ago
  When was the last time a developed capitalist nation had a civil war, or even a major violent revolt? Reminder: Before those developed capitalist nations became what they are now, they also had their share of civil wars and major violent revolts.
  - GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
    Yes, and?
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  Oh boy, are you in for a big surprise.
- 20after4 10y ago
  > When was the last time a developed capitalist nation had a civil war, or even a major violent revolt? Ask again in a year or two.
anigbrowl 10y ago
I'm anticapitalist but your smug tone does nothing to advance the discussion or help people to find effective alternatives.
afsina 10y ago
Capitalism, as free markets are anti-state.