3 ms·
You're wrong, in two senses. Being "based on" means that private ownership and operation for profit are necessary conditions. It doesn't mean that they are suf
by esarbe 3y ago
You're wrong, in two senses.
Being "based on" means that private ownership and operation for profit are necessary conditions. It doesn't mean that they are sufficient; i.e.just because you have private ownership and operation for profit doesn't mean you have capitalism. We had private ownership and operation for profit long before there was capitalism, in systems that are not capitalism. (This is the modal fallacy)
The second error is closely related. Not everything that has private ownership and operation for profit is capitalism. It could be Syndicalism, for example, which also has private property and operation for profit. (This is the fallacy of faulty generalization)
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_fallacy
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization
- alvah 3y agoSo the first sentence of the wikipedia article you linked about capitalism is now wrong, based on 2 other wikipedia articles? I don't think this is a productive direction for discussion tbh.
- esarbe 3y ago> So the first sentence of the wikipedia article you linked about capitalism is now wrong No, it's not wrong, the articles is perfectly fine and they don't contradict each other. The phrase "Capitalism is based on private ownership and operation for profit" is absolutely true. But the conclusion you're drawing from these sentences is wrong. If I say "Crêpe is a dish based on flour and eggs" that doesn't mean that if I have flour and eggs I have a Crêpe - because to prepare Crêpe I also need other stuff. If I say "Crêpe is a dish based on flour and eggs" that doesn't mean that everything made from flour and eggs is a Crêpe - because there are many things made from flour and eggs that are not Crêpe. Does that make it clearer?