4 ms·

So what's your definition of capitalism? I think the original definition originated sometime in the 19th century, probably from Marx, and it meant the actual,

So what's your definition of capitalism? I think the original definition originated sometime in the 19th century, probably from Marx, and it meant the actual, real world system (this is different from communism, which designated an ideal). I always understood it as an economic system based on two characteristics: 1. Private ownership of capital. 2. Labor as a market commodity. I think these two aptly describe both 19th century and current economic systems, and I don't think this implies anything about symbiosis (or lack of thereof) between government and business. Addendum: Maybe you mean free market, which, in my view, is a different thing. At least because it, like communism, describes an ideal, not an factually existing system (I am not aware of sufficiently closed economic system which could be considered to be a free market).

ctdonath 12y ago
3. Liberty to mutually contract. "Pay this fee to a 3rd party or you go to jail" isn't.
- burgers 12y ago
  "Liberty" is definitely not a part of Capitalism. In capitalism liberty only applies to those with capital, just like liberty only applies to those with power in any system.
  - ctdonath 12y ago
    Everyone has capital, if only their minds & muscles - therefore all have liberty, and are capitalists.
    - burgers 12y ago
      While "sweat equity" is a fun ideal, in reality it is not very similar to passive equity. That is in essence what wealth in capitalism is. Income via passive equity. When one is dependent on "their minds & muscles", what that actually means is that they are forced to work in government approved income activities(nothing illegal) or face imprisonment or death. That doesn't sound much like liberty to me. On the other hand, those with enough passive equity no longer need to work in government approved activities provided by the asset class, and very much do enjoy the benefits of liberty. That said, it is very obvious to are tied to an ideology(likely because it benefits you a great deal personally), and I won't spend any more time trying to enlighten you.
    - gress 12y ago
      Nope. Capital is what you own, not what you are. You can exchange labor for capital, but until you do, you do not have capital.
jeffdavis 12y ago
Free market (in ideal form or not) is a prerequisite for capitalism.
vegancap 12y ago
"So what's your definition of capitalism?" - Mutual, voluntary free economic association of trade in commodity, time and subjective value. The original definition was prior to that, first used by Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot in a positive, anti-feudalist sense. Those two are components of Capitalism, but by no means is is inclusive of the concept of central governance. When banks are centralised, they aren't privately owned. When the money and currency itself is printed and distributed by a central regime, it isn't private. So when the value itself isn't private, then ownership of capital isn't private. The terminology to best describe this hybrid of centralised ownership of currency and labor and partial free-markets are better described as 'Corporatism' or to be more brutal an 'Oligarchy'.
- asgard1024 12y ago
  > The original definition was prior to that, first used by Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot in a positive, anti-feudalist sense. I think you're wrong. I looked around the Internet and it really seems that the word "capitalism" originated from "capitalist", first used by Marx in Communist Manifesto. See e.g. https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1005122700456 https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1005122700456 (I would be interested to see exact quote from Turgot, that uses the word.) What you describe was called "economic freedom" or "economic liberalism". And I already said that, when I mentioned "free market". Markets obviously are prerequisite for capitalism, but they don't have to be free in this sense.
- TheCoelacanth 12y ago
  You're describing laissez-faire capitalism, which is a subset of unqualified capitalism. Any system where all or most of the means of production are privately owned and operated for profit is a form capitalism, regardless of what the government does to manipulate the market.

ctdonath 12y ago

3. Liberty to mutually contract. "Pay this fee to a 3rd party or you go to jail" isn't.

burgers 12y ago
"Liberty" is definitely not a part of Capitalism. In capitalism liberty only applies to those with capital, just like liberty only applies to those with power in any system.
- ctdonath 12y ago
  Everyone has capital, if only their minds & muscles - therefore all have liberty, and are capitalists.
  - burgers 12y ago
    While "sweat equity" is a fun ideal, in reality it is not very similar to passive equity. That is in essence what wealth in capitalism is. Income via passive equity. When one is dependent on "their minds & muscles", what that actually means is that they are forced to work in government approved income activities(nothing illegal) or face imprisonment or death. That doesn't sound much like liberty to me. On the other hand, those with enough passive equity no longer need to work in government approved activities provided by the asset class, and very much do enjoy the benefits of liberty. That said, it is very obvious to are tied to an ideology(likely because it benefits you a great deal personally), and I won't spend any more time trying to enlighten you.
  - gress 12y ago
    Nope. Capital is what you own, not what you are. You can exchange labor for capital, but until you do, you do not have capital.

jeffdavis 12y ago

Free market (in ideal form or not) is a prerequisite for capitalism.

vegancap 12y ago

"So what's your definition of capitalism?" - Mutual, voluntary free economic association of trade in commodity, time and subjective value. The original definition was prior to that, first used by Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot in a positive, anti-feudalist sense. Those two are components of Capitalism, but by no means is is inclusive of the concept of central governance. When banks are centralised, they aren't privately owned. When the money and currency itself is printed and distributed by a central regime, it isn't private. So when the value itself isn't private, then ownership of capital isn't private. The terminology to best describe this hybrid of centralised ownership of currency and labor and partial free-markets are better described as 'Corporatism' or to be more brutal an 'Oligarchy'.

asgard1024 12y ago
> The original definition was prior to that, first used by Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot in a positive, anti-feudalist sense. I think you're wrong. I looked around the Internet and it really seems that the word "capitalism" originated from "capitalist", first used by Marx in Communist Manifesto. See e.g. https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1005122700456 https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1005122700456 (I would be interested to see exact quote from Turgot, that uses the word.) What you describe was called "economic freedom" or "economic liberalism". And I already said that, when I mentioned "free market". Markets obviously are prerequisite for capitalism, but they don't have to be free in this sense.
TheCoelacanth 12y ago
You're describing laissez-faire capitalism, which is a subset of unqualified capitalism. Any system where all or most of the means of production are privately owned and operated for profit is a form capitalism, regardless of what the government does to manipulate the market.