5 ms·

While parts of his story resonate and it fun to to hear people explain phenomena based on different ideologies, I've never heard an alternative to capitalism th

by chwahoo 16y ago

While parts of his story resonate and it fun to to hear people explain phenomena based on different ideologies, I've never heard an alternative to capitalism that sounded credible at a large scale. (Most any system could work at a small scale.)

forkandwait 16y ago
All the successful large scale nations (the US, the UK, China, Germany, Japan, etc) are some mix of socialist and capitalist organization, and probably pretty close to 60%/40% in one direction or the other. In a socialist nation, there are usually at least small local produce markets etc; in a "capitalist" nation like the US there are a huge amount of services and regulations that are socialist (the cops, some welfare, etc, etc). In a middle country like Japan or Germany, the government works very closely with the firms to try to effect non-market driven policy and outcomes that have society-wide benefits as their rationale. And... every society is an immensely complex machine, and probably can't be boiled down to an ideology (something Marx never understood, hence his inability to actually propose an alternative besides a utopian vision, and his inability to be a very effective political actor.)
- tkahn6 16y ago
  And notice that that the US, UK, Germany, and Japan are all in dire economic straits right now. Also, the police force not a socialist institution. To sustain a free market requires the state-sanctioned protection of life and property. The police force is a very 'capitalist' institution.
  - chwahoo 16y ago
    Regarding the police, I know that there is a least a subset of libertarian capitalists that would disagree with you. They seem to dislike the police and strongly prefer gun rights for protection of self and property.
    - ovi256 16y ago
      >They seem to dislike the police and strongly prefer gun rights for protection of self and property. The Wild West huh? Well, we know how that turns out: professional pistoleros rob at will, and honest citizens flee to towns that have a police force. Back to square one.
      - kiba 16y ago
        The Wild West huh? These same libertarians would use examples of the wild west as "not so wild west". Their historical interpretation is a bit different than yours.
  - Sumason 16y ago
    "The police force is a very 'capitalist' institution." Seriously? Are you are claiming that socialism has very little or no need for police? This whole statement seems a little... shoddy.
    - yummyfajitas 16y ago
      Your statement is a non-sequitur. The fact that socialism requires a police force does not negate the fact that capitalism also requires one. Similarly, in a socialist nation, people eat hamburgers. This does not imply that hamburgers eat people in a capitalist nation.
  - forkandwait 16y ago
    Well, China is doing pretty OK and they are to the socialist side of the continuum. And, as long as we are trading isolated examples to prove general theories, what country is on the capitalist side of the spectrum and doing notably well? For bonus points, find me a nation that bet the farm on innovative securities and is doing especially well. Don't get me wrong, I love markets and entrepeneurship (sp?); I just tend toward the Rockefeller Republican / Conservative Democrat zone, in which we believe that (1) the important thing is the details of governance (tax policy details, not debates about whether taxes are good) and (2) that "society" is more fundamental than "the market."
    - tkahn6 16y ago
      Well, Brazil is doing pretty well. My point was not to prove a general theory by isolated example - simply to provide a counterpoint. I think it's more fruitful to compare the economic/moral philosophies of these systems than to compare examples of them. Primarily because no isolated example is a paragon of its stated parent philosophy and (more practically) because a Marxist country doesn't exist and a capitalist country doesn't exist to compare. And I'm genuinely curious how you separate tax policy debate from whether taxes are good. I don't think any socioeconomic system says all taxes are bad, but they do differ on what it is moral to tax for.
      - loewenskind 16y ago
        A pure capitalist country was tried in Chile though. They had to back out the "purity" pretty quickly.
- chwahoo 16y ago
  That most countries employ various mixes of policies generally fits with my thinking about how things should work. Bugs in the systems should be addressed through incremental changes. While I think countries shouldn't be run by strict adherence to the rules of an -ism, people who subscribe to an -ism are useful because they help frame and suggest solutions to the bugs in the current organization of society. The problem with the -ism folks is that they are hard to disprove because society will never reflect a pure enough implementation of their ideas. Where things get dicey is when politicians buy too strongly into a particular -ism and aren't able to employ other tools when necessary.
  - kiba 16y ago
    That most countries employ various mixes of policies generally fits with my thinking about how things should work. Bugs in the systems should be addressed through incremental changes Why not radical changes? Where things get dicey is when politicians buy too strongly into a particular -ism and aren't able to employ other tools when necessary. How do we know what kind of idealism that politicians are employing? Why not think that they're just a bunch of self-interested politicians who wants the vote? How do you know which tools are suited to which problems? How do you know if they're suited to any problems at all?
    - chwahoo 16y ago
      > Why not radical changes? I think the motivation for radical changes is based on the idea that we are stuck in a "local maxima" (of some "goodness of society" function) that gradual change can only optimize to some limited degree and that large change is required to put us on a different part of the curve that can be maximized to a greater degree. But I've never seen a proposed (or implemented) radical reorganization that I believed would put us on a path some global maxima (or better local maxima). Taken a step further, I don't believe that we are stuck in a local maxima and think we can make significant positive change using gradual reform.
  - tkahn6 16y ago
    I think you have some good points but whose to say an -ism isn't the correct philosophy? You assume that -isms are inherently wrong. Why?

by chwahoo 16y ago

forkandwait 16y ago

All the successful large scale nations (the US, the UK, China, Germany, Japan, etc) are some mix of socialist and capitalist organization, and probably pretty close to 60%/40% in one direction or the other. In a socialist nation, there are usually at least small local produce markets etc; in a "capitalist" nation like the US there are a huge amount of services and regulations that are socialist (the cops, some welfare, etc, etc). In a middle country like Japan or Germany, the government works very closely with the firms to try to effect non-market driven policy and outcomes that have society-wide benefits as their rationale. And... every society is an immensely complex machine, and probably can't be boiled down to an ideology (something Marx never understood, hence his inability to actually propose an alternative besides a utopian vision, and his inability to be a very effective political actor.)

tkahn6 16y ago
And notice that that the US, UK, Germany, and Japan are all in dire economic straits right now. Also, the police force not a socialist institution. To sustain a free market requires the state-sanctioned protection of life and property. The police force is a very 'capitalist' institution.
- chwahoo 16y ago
  Regarding the police, I know that there is a least a subset of libertarian capitalists that would disagree with you. They seem to dislike the police and strongly prefer gun rights for protection of self and property.
  - ovi256 16y ago
    >They seem to dislike the police and strongly prefer gun rights for protection of self and property. The Wild West huh? Well, we know how that turns out: professional pistoleros rob at will, and honest citizens flee to towns that have a police force. Back to square one.
    - kiba 16y ago
      The Wild West huh? These same libertarians would use examples of the wild west as "not so wild west". Their historical interpretation is a bit different than yours.
- Sumason 16y ago
  "The police force is a very 'capitalist' institution." Seriously? Are you are claiming that socialism has very little or no need for police? This whole statement seems a little... shoddy.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    Your statement is a non-sequitur. The fact that socialism requires a police force does not negate the fact that capitalism also requires one. Similarly, in a socialist nation, people eat hamburgers. This does not imply that hamburgers eat people in a capitalist nation.
- forkandwait 16y ago
  Well, China is doing pretty OK and they are to the socialist side of the continuum. And, as long as we are trading isolated examples to prove general theories, what country is on the capitalist side of the spectrum and doing notably well? For bonus points, find me a nation that bet the farm on innovative securities and is doing especially well. Don't get me wrong, I love markets and entrepeneurship (sp?); I just tend toward the Rockefeller Republican / Conservative Democrat zone, in which we believe that (1) the important thing is the details of governance (tax policy details, not debates about whether taxes are good) and (2) that "society" is more fundamental than "the market."
  - tkahn6 16y ago
    Well, Brazil is doing pretty well. My point was not to prove a general theory by isolated example - simply to provide a counterpoint. I think it's more fruitful to compare the economic/moral philosophies of these systems than to compare examples of them. Primarily because no isolated example is a paragon of its stated parent philosophy and (more practically) because a Marxist country doesn't exist and a capitalist country doesn't exist to compare. And I'm genuinely curious how you separate tax policy debate from whether taxes are good. I don't think any socioeconomic system says all taxes are bad, but they do differ on what it is moral to tax for.
    - loewenskind 16y ago
      A pure capitalist country was tried in Chile though. They had to back out the "purity" pretty quickly.
chwahoo 16y ago
That most countries employ various mixes of policies generally fits with my thinking about how things should work. Bugs in the systems should be addressed through incremental changes. While I think countries shouldn't be run by strict adherence to the rules of an -ism, people who subscribe to an -ism are useful because they help frame and suggest solutions to the bugs in the current organization of society. The problem with the -ism folks is that they are hard to disprove because society will never reflect a pure enough implementation of their ideas. Where things get dicey is when politicians buy too strongly into a particular -ism and aren't able to employ other tools when necessary.
- kiba 16y ago
  That most countries employ various mixes of policies generally fits with my thinking about how things should work. Bugs in the systems should be addressed through incremental changes Why not radical changes? Where things get dicey is when politicians buy too strongly into a particular -ism and aren't able to employ other tools when necessary. How do we know what kind of idealism that politicians are employing? Why not think that they're just a bunch of self-interested politicians who wants the vote? How do you know which tools are suited to which problems? How do you know if they're suited to any problems at all?
  - chwahoo 16y ago
    > Why not radical changes? I think the motivation for radical changes is based on the idea that we are stuck in a "local maxima" (of some "goodness of society" function) that gradual change can only optimize to some limited degree and that large change is required to put us on a different part of the curve that can be maximized to a greater degree. But I've never seen a proposed (or implemented) radical reorganization that I believed would put us on a path some global maxima (or better local maxima). Taken a step further, I don't believe that we are stuck in a local maxima and think we can make significant positive change using gradual reform.
- tkahn6 16y ago
  I think you have some good points but whose to say an -ism isn't the correct philosophy? You assume that -isms are inherently wrong. Why?