4 ms·

My own observations of this 'blame capitalism' trend in collective social murmuring gained amplitude perhaps a decade ago, becoming really strong in the past 5

My own observations of this 'blame capitalism' trend in collective social murmuring gained amplitude perhaps a decade ago, becoming really strong in the past 5 years. I am profoundly puzzled at the 'ad-hocness' and superficiality of the oft presented argument (which this articles is just an sample of). It is not because 'capitalism' is some sacred cow, or that the social maladies affecting communities are irrelevant or unimportant. It is the lack of understanding the very assumptions one makes about the alternatives (as well as 'capitalism' as a concept). Just as any non-material concept, such as democracy, love, courage, and etc, so capitalism is a model, an abstraction of reality, which is context dependent. So my contribution to the argument is to bring to attention that just as social-democracy can be de-facto a dictatorship, or 'love' can be a prison, or dictatorship can bring religious freedom and the end of slavery (e.g. early Persian empire) and contrast it with early America colonization governments, similarly capitalism as a concept can be approached. Fundamentally, it is the mixture of government (power) with private enterprise (wealth) that historically is known to generate the greatest human corruption. Just like there people recognized that religion and state should be separated to avoid corruption of both, it should be followed by a divorce of private enterprise and state. [if one should summarize it in one sentence]. It has nothing to do with capitalism, socialism, nationalism, communism... the principle lies elsewhere.

bladelessninja2 4y ago
I cannot agree on your last point: capitalism is a system where those two (government and private enterprise) are separated by design, simply because first one has little power over second (free market) and second has little power over first (no interest in corrupting officials if there is nothing or little to gain).
- M95D 4y ago
  > no interest in corrupting officials if there is nothing or little to gain Except there's a lot to gain! Don't you remember when banks were saved in 2008? Don't you remember that copyrights used to be 28 years? Don't you remember the times when you could build your own vehicle, pass an inspection and then legaly drive it on public roads?
  - bladelessninja2 4y ago
    That's my point - there would be never a discussion about saving bankers in 2008 if there was capitalism, capitalism rejects ANY intervention into free market (except maybe anti monopoly laws). That only proofs that it is not capitalism here to blame - it is corrupted politicians that gained too much power through socialism in the name of "social justice" (which has so much in common with "justice" as "electric chair" has with "chair").
    - piva00 4y ago
      This capitalism you're talking about is an imaginary construction. It never existed, never will. Why are you being a demagogue and defending an ideal? You know very well what people refer to as capitalism, the one that exist in reality. Not some lofty idea you want to defend. > but you (of course) play big intellectual and pretend it is OK to ignore facts. Grow up.
      - bladelessninja2 4y ago
        > This capitalism you're talking about is an imaginary construction. It never existed, never will. I hope you understand that we are referring to models there, right? Your point that you can't discuss ideas because model is not reality is ridiculous - with that philosophy we would never had any engineering done. It's like arguing with someone who said "I have wooden house" with an argument "No mate, your door handles are metal". > You know very well what people refer to as capitalism, the one that exist in reality. And that is exactly what I'm fighting against - total confusion, calling capitalism system where Tax Freedom Day is in August (talking about some European countries) - you want to blame capitalism where there system is far from the idea of capitalism. Like I explained before: you disassemble wheels from a car and wonder why it is not working - here, you are removing the very reason why capitalism works (by restraining economic freedom, expanding welfare) and you are surprised that it isn't working. > Grow up. I was just referring to your comment about things being obvious where you have clearly some problems explaining your thoughts.
    - M95D 4y ago

bladelessninja2 4y ago

I cannot agree on your last point: capitalism is a system where those two (government and private enterprise) are separated by design, simply because first one has little power over second (free market) and second has little power over first (no interest in corrupting officials if there is nothing or little to gain).

M95D 4y ago
> no interest in corrupting officials if there is nothing or little to gain Except there's a lot to gain! Don't you remember when banks were saved in 2008? Don't you remember that copyrights used to be 28 years? Don't you remember the times when you could build your own vehicle, pass an inspection and then legaly drive it on public roads?
- bladelessninja2 4y ago
  That's my point - there would be never a discussion about saving bankers in 2008 if there was capitalism, capitalism rejects ANY intervention into free market (except maybe anti monopoly laws). That only proofs that it is not capitalism here to blame - it is corrupted politicians that gained too much power through socialism in the name of "social justice" (which has so much in common with "justice" as "electric chair" has with "chair").
  - piva00 4y ago
    This capitalism you're talking about is an imaginary construction. It never existed, never will. Why are you being a demagogue and defending an ideal? You know very well what people refer to as capitalism, the one that exist in reality. Not some lofty idea you want to defend. > but you (of course) play big intellectual and pretend it is OK to ignore facts. Grow up.
    - bladelessninja2 4y ago
      > This capitalism you're talking about is an imaginary construction. It never existed, never will. I hope you understand that we are referring to models there, right? Your point that you can't discuss ideas because model is not reality is ridiculous - with that philosophy we would never had any engineering done. It's like arguing with someone who said "I have wooden house" with an argument "No mate, your door handles are metal". > You know very well what people refer to as capitalism, the one that exist in reality. And that is exactly what I'm fighting against - total confusion, calling capitalism system where Tax Freedom Day is in August (talking about some European countries) - you want to blame capitalism where there system is far from the idea of capitalism. Like I explained before: you disassemble wheels from a car and wonder why it is not working - here, you are removing the very reason why capitalism works (by restraining economic freedom, expanding welfare) and you are surprised that it isn't working. > Grow up. I was just referring to your comment about things being obvious where you have clearly some problems explaining your thoughts.
  - M95D 4y ago