Jusunlee.com Forums (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/index.php)
- Debate (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=19)
-- capitalism (https://www.jusunlee.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=2558)

capitalism

just wanted to bring this topic up, i'm not going to write much now, if i'm compelled to write more later, perhaps, but what are your thoughts on capitalism, is it good, is it bad, should we look for alternatives...

__________________
word is bond

No system is perfect.
Capitalism, while it has its merits, also has it's faults. While it encourages "free trade" and more economic freedom, it also develops class systems which (depending on the viewpoint one is taking) may or may not be a good thing. Therefore most people within these classes, with the majority from the lower classes, decidedly seek a more fair and perfect society.
That ideal, or utopian society has been most closely associated with Marxist Communism. However, for that to work, the people in it must all have utopian ideals of fairness and sharing, which we all know is impossible. First, because everyone has a different set of values and ethics and Second, because at the heart of Human nature lies animalistic qualities such as ambition and greed. Thus, there would be strife within the society which in turn would break it apart.
So, again, no society is perfect....which sucks :huh:

__________________
ni pour ni contre; ça m'est égal

"The weight of this sad time we must obey,/ Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say./ The oldest hath borne most; we that are young/ Shall never see so much, nor live so long."
King Lear (V.3.300-304)

bump

yay, capitalism. What's everyone think about it?

I don't feel like writing that much cause i'm about to go to sleep but i don't remember seeing this topic before. So...anyway i like capitalism to an extent. But, i'm speaking from a position where i really don't have to work hard to get anything. I'm all ready in there, and i don't have to further indulge in rugged individualism to find a place where i could live comfortably. If i was in a poorer status right now, i might think differently. But just because i say i like it doesn't mean i think it's the best system. It forms class sytems, and it's the epitome of human greed and the like. It encourages the rich to get richer and the poor to "work hard and you'll get there." When in reality, the poor will never all be able to make it to a comfortable standard of living. It's idealistic in a capitalist society. Sure, we have more "freedom" and "rights" but is that the best system for a civilization to operate on? Again, it creates a difference in classes by the very nature of the system. And, though people say socialism is utopian and everyone must share the same idealistic ideals in order for it to work. I think if socialism is done right, then it is probably the best form that has been postulated.
People can argue it's idealistic, but we've never had a country in the world that has done socialism correctly so there is no need to get rid of socialism entirely because it has failed in the past. I'll grant this though, capitalism has a very big advantage with innovation and the like. But, if we are to create a civilization in which we stray far from a libertarian view (i am sort of a libertarian if you must ask, i'm just commenting on this thread becuase i find it intriguing and if i were to be raised under it i might think differently) then socialism would do probably teh best job in taking care of it's own people. Everyone says "ooh communism is too idealist to work" but they have no idea why they say that, it's easy to say taht and not understand why it is or how it could be improved upon. It IS a good idea if a civilization's task is to protect and take care of it's own people. Think about it, it's not that idealistic if it's done right. If it had been in place for several generations, and from day one of a child's birth they were taught the "idealistic" values of socialism...it could feasibly work. Teaching a nation to want to protect it's own, just like we teach our kids today to innovate and be free market capitalists in our society, to make it on their own, and be rugged individualists, entrepreneurs and the rest. An education could aid in the legitimizing of this system. We could teach our children socialist ideals, and it would not be so idealist then. Sure, we'd have people bound on their own greed, but if we inflict that much disciplinary power with governmental intervention...i'm sure it could be rectified. yes, i know it sounds weird to hear me actually saying to use disciplinary power for the good of a nation, but in this society it would have to play a key role.
Clearly, whatever civilization taht would undertake this task would have to have an immense amount of disciplinary power for it to work. A french philosopher, Michel Foucault, wrote a lot about this...isolatory from capitalism though. I really don't think that is too far fetched for it to be considered totally idealist if we combine the too idealisms of marx and foucault though. I haven't read taht much marx and that is not helping right now, but i don't know how he planned on implementing socialism into real life, but i'd think this would be the most logical way. Education is the greatest discipline, and authors such as...hmm forgot, anyway they adduce disciplinary powers effects in religion and severly in such cases as the holy crusades and holy wars. It is a powerful thing. Anyway, even if the rebels arrive and succumb to greed. Socialism is not such a constricted system. It does have private sectors and that is one of the things that makes it better than communism. Don't confuse the two. Sure, one of the problems or impending problems of socialism is the high tax rates...but, if we are raised with the ideals that we need to be all utilitarian...i really dont' see it as that big of a problem to a non capitalist society. It'd only be relativistically a problem. Ooh i'm talking in circles, anyway disciplinary power is a great tool that has to be used in order for it to work. When we discipline ourselves, then we can maximize the potentiality of the system. I don't think it's THAT big of a leap to make that.
And, then there's the issue of innovation and economic prosperity. It'd be obvious that socialist nations would have a greater probability to have less innovation and hence be lesser advanced than capitalist societies...but then again, isn't that another relativistic problem? Ah, this is starting to sound bad, i'll stop. I should read more about this.

As for right now, i like capitalism, but i don't think it does its people justice in all fairness. It's responsible for a lot of mal factions such as class construction, entrenching of the poor, encouraging of the seeking to seek more even if it is beyond their grasp, and the neglecting of a government on its people. There's more reasons that are probably better. Ahh i have to go to sleep, i didn't want to type this long. Anyway, if i was raised under a socialist system i'd probably think that was great since it'd have such a better well being of the people. But, since i'm raised in a capitalist society and i'm greedy like that, i like capitalism. Yay. Have fun reading that if you would like. If you did, thakn you.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

quote:

---

Originally posted by PsychoSnowman

I don't feel like writing that much...

---

I guess I really can't complain about capitalism and the advantages it provides. After all, I'm sitting in front of the computer on my desk in the room of my house, etc. etc. and so forth.

For the sake of discussion, though, I do have a few gripes about capitalism, or at least the system that I know and live with:

-In a system designed for winners take all, there has to be losers. We all may be in the top 10%, without a care in the world for the bottom 90%. I may join Greenpeace or the Peace Corps, but I'm sure as hell not going to spend my time around the North Side (Kzoo reference, a low-income area).

-In the same design, for a 'Free' market economy such as ours, there must be periods of both prosperity AND recession, such as now. Those periods are based by and large on the willingness of a consumer to spend his money on goods and services i.e. The stock market climate prior to the Great Depression.

-In a system/society where an individual's value is based on financial support, the best jobs are landed by those that can pay for them, and others without education/money are left in the cold, unable to understand, parcipate, or affect economics and government that they can't understand. I'd like to think that voter turnouts are somehow tied to this.

-A representative government relies on the decisions of its voters, thus, the aims and actions of the government correlate with those who hold the voter base. With a roughly 50% voter turnout, and the aforementioned preference of the wealthy and educated to hold positions of legislative power, who runs things?

-A corporate elite protected by laws and tax codes leads to abuse. See Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, so on and so forth. Granted, those responsible have been largely rooted out, but in the end Kenneth Lay will still have his house with his servants, while the greater bulk of his employees have to find new jobs. And he'll even have a new Lexus.

-A history of abuse and corruptions leads to legislative action by the central government. Again, the agendas of legislature can be, and are, controlled by those who hold the reins.

-While a Congressman may have to represent the voter base in his district, he still is by and large either a Republican and Democrat. That means, he is replaceable by those in the RNC/DNC. Such a process may take time, but these are far-reaching people. The legislation of a term in office can and does affect the law for decades to come.

Summary Ideas so far:

-Western governments, so afraid of strong government, have led themselves to having no government at all. Just financial power. (A tip of the ol' hippo to Deus Ex).

-A regimentation(sic?) of society, or a pyramid of power, leads to abuse. While we would like to think of the 'silent majority,' or the foundation of the pyramid, as having determinism and conscience of their situation, the voter turnout (and may I say, the recent Hill elections ) mentioned before is a good litmus test of the conscience of the American voter.

-I would much rather prefer a competetive monopoly to an oligarchy. In other words, I don't agree with Plato.

More as I think of it.

**EDIT**

-A government built around the 'basic weaknesses' of human beings are bound to produce the same qualities in its leaders. It is the mark of the educated man to avoid greed, ambition, lust, and so on in favor of accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness.

__________________
"Wave of mutilation."
-The Pixies

To what David was talking about before, I think most of the 'socialist' references should be replaced by 'communist.' Sweden is a socialist country, and the Nazi's, National Socialists, were advocates of the consolidation and centralization of the power bulk. It cannot be denied that they made remarkable advances in the standard of living, industrial potential, and scientific progress of Germany and its people. The moral and ethical compass of the Third Reich was...horrendous.... but they ran a tight ship.

__________________
"Wave of mutilation."
-The Pixies

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ladi Jay
hahaha, I read that and I was like, "yey!" then I scrolled down and was like,

anyway, I agree with what David said... but capitalism is one of the best systems... that's why the US is doing so well, although our nation could collapse... beats me, I'm still learning

---

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Yes!

__________________
"Wave of mutilation."
-The Pixies

quote:

---

Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
well, i guess. But it depends on what you mean by "best." From your elaboration in the next sentence, i suppose it could be best in that aspect yes. Innovation and economic growth are benefits of capitalism. But, really what happens is that there is just the top majority of people prospering pulling along a bunch of dead weight of people who can't get any good paying jobs and hence become grouped into a big group that we just call "capitalism", therefore, capitalism is best because it is succesful....well for the percent that it actually works for. The rest just get dragged along and we presuppose/forget about them and say it's good.

---

Capitalism must be brought down, i also agree with daNNy. As for i, communism is the way, REAL communism!

__________________
One Love, Peace, GOD Bless!



Scream!!! FOB Style

It's pointless to even attempt to design a perfect system because there are far too many factors in the real world to make something that will govern all equally. Even if someone could figure out the mathematics for all systems of government and all that nonsense, there would always be the chaotic mind of man to deal with, which can never truly be governed by one "perfect" system.
Every system has flaws, some more than others, but I think the main reason capitalism is working better now than others is because, generally speaking of course, an individual has the chance to move themself towards a higher class without the explicit assistance of others. Now you might say that the way it is now it's not really possible, but it happens to some people and when people see that, it doesn't make them hate the system. Instead they embrace it for that hope it gives them.
It's inherent in humans to want to make themselves better than they are now. People are always striving for achievement it seems, and capitalism embraces that whereas its competition, socialism, does not. I think that might be the main fault of socialism, that it doesn't allow mankind the freedom for the achievement (and recognition) it desires.

Then again, upon rereading this, it might not make much sense at all. This definitely isn't what has been running through my head while reading this.

__________________
When the day is done
you are all that is left

capitalism

no, capitalism doesn't work, i'll agree with that. but become communist? no way. capitalism is no way near perfect, but communism rewards the lazy. dictatorships, i feel work best, as long as the dictator stays loyal to his nation and not become sadistic. its not the government systems that don't work, it's the people who run them who are not perfect in our democratic republic, too many people can go corrupt, there are too many senators, too many people in high places. we need to rid of that and install a dictatorship, if we can find a good dictator (if you want to appoint me pm me! no don't do that i'm just joking)

since when did this thread become a discussion on whether or not capitalism or any system is perfect? We can move on, no system is perfect, of course.

Anyway, kryogenix, i think you are confusing economic and government systems. Capitalism is an economic system, not governmental. The opposite is true with a dictatorship.

And, whilst all the socialist mentality, i think capitalism works.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

The first post lacked direction. The second post introduced the imperfections of capitalism. We went from there.

__________________
When the day is done
you are all that is left

quote:

---

Originally posted by requiem
The first post lacked direction. The second post introduced the imperfections of capitalism. We went from there.

---

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell