5 ms·
Powerful states were a prerequisite for capitalist development. How’s that for dissonance? Actually that doesn’t pose any kind of cognitive dissonance to more
by yrimaxi 6y ago
Powerful states were a prerequisite for capitalist development. How’s that for dissonance?
Actually that doesn’t pose any kind of cognitive dissonance to more mainstream economists since they know what role the state must play in a capitalist economy. Which is not “leave it be”.
- WalterBright 6y agoThe role of government in free markets is as guarantor of rights.
- nybble41 6y agoAnd to that end you don't actually need a state. There are other means to guarantee rights that don't inherently undermine themselves by directly infringing rights in the process. The state is a protection racket. They claim to exist to defend you—mostly from other states, or other entities that do pretty much exactly what states do with without the false veneer of "legitimacy"—but in the end the only real threat to your life and property if you don't do as they demand comes from the state itself. Unfortunately they're a popular protection racket, with a large emphasis on PR and propaganda, so if you try to stand up for yourself your own neighbours will turn on you rather than joining you.
- logicchains 6y agoAmerica wasn't a powerful state prior to the 1900s.
- yrimaxi 6y agoSorry. I meant strong states. Not inter-nationally speaking but in its own territory.