3 ms·
Sometimes the overall trend in quality-of-life improvements (democratization, healthcare, education, ...) are attributed to capitalism, when in reality almost a
by jijijijij 2y ago
Sometimes the overall trend in quality-of-life improvements (democratization, healthcare, education, ...) are attributed to capitalism, when in reality almost all of these positive developments happened despite the capitalistic influences, at best, but usually in grave opposition to it. Capitalism has never brought us public infrastructure and education, environmental, food and workplace protections, social welfare, or universal healthcare. All these have been heavily fought for against capitalist interests, paid for with suffering, blood and tears. Where regulation is weak, life is hell. Outspoken free market absolutists/apologists tend to be people, who think of themselves as top predators, entitled to power and influence, always privileged, yet sooo unfairly treated in a more egalitarian system. (Everybody is gangster until they get punched in the face...) I think, these days political economy is, contrary to popular belief in entrepreneurial circles, mostly in agreement about the dynamics at work here: For the general case, free markets don't work without regulation. The most important markets (existential goods) are prone to natural monopolies.
This shouldn't be surprising really, since profit doesn't relate to broader human welfare directly, how could putting selective pressure on this single metric directly cause prosperity?! It's coincidence or human confounding factors/intervention leading to good outcomes, despite any free market ideology. Without the causal link, any argument about efficiency or stability is void. Ideological capitalism, or free market absolutism is the Torment Nexus of Goodhart's Law.
Case in point, while politically we're perpetually negotiating the extent of social darwinistic fallout of the capitalistic order, knowingly, but below the radar of affect, we're spending our planet, our long-term existential foundation three times over. Now, you don't need an academically forged "capitalistic system" in place to get self-inflicted crisis, as any preindustrial culture which transformed their prosperous island into desert rock can attest (over-consumption leading to terminal erosion), it's the lack of informed regulation in the interest of humankind.
- Nasrudith 2y agoIf you think profit doesn't relate to human welfare directly then I welcome you to head into any economically depressed third world village and turn it into a utopia. Oh wait, you can't maintain the sizable bureaucratic structure and intellectual workforce when over 90% of the population is engaged in subsidence farming by necessity in order to not die of starvation. You quite literally take the productivity of capitalism for granted and assume that its products are simply the natural state of existence, and that in the absence of the evil capitalist you would have instant magical utopias. Such folly is like thinking that if you got rid of the evil and heavy pollution-spewing engine burdening your car, you would then go even faster without any of that pollution. The work being performed is vital, even though it is outside of your ideologically blinkered willful inability to understand. The rapid growth of education depended upon capitalism and the rise of paper-making and printing operations which themselves are dependent upon profit seeking and the price discovery mechanisms. More importantly it depended upon there being a market for books a middle class which could usefully apply those results. If you find yourself wondering "why didn't revolutionary invention X, Y, or Z take off at this period even further in the past" the usual answer you get is that they lacked an essential prerequisite for its deployment.
- jijijijij 2y agoYou are mixing everything up and honestly seem to be a bit hysteric. Nobody rang the red door. Nobody is talking about magical utopias. You can calm down and stop barking. I made an argument for sane regulation and its role in history. Since you are not even addressing the direct casual relationship and generously conflate capitalism with industrialization, I won't engage further.