Skip to comments.Is It Possible to Criticize Some Aspects of Capitalism, Without Being Labelled a Socialist?
Posted on 02/17/2012 8:05:14 AM PST by pinochet
The leader of the Russian Communist Revolution, Vladmir Lenin, once declared that: "The capitalists will give us the rope, which we shall use to hang them".
For most of American history, capitalism has been a force for good, because most of America's leading capitalists were patriotic citizens, who were also devout Christians. So long as American capitalism is in the hands of patriotic Christians, the forces of capitalism can be harnessed to do a lot of good for America and the world. J. D. Rockefeller's fortune built the University of Chicago and other useful projects during his lifetime. American capitalist funds converted Harvard, Princeton, and Yale - which were founded as Christian seminaries to train clergymen, into world class universities. But the Rockefeller Foundation, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, have been hijacked by anti-Christian forces, and been used as tools to undermine American culture.
But we have to consider the possibility that a capitalist system can be very dangerous, if it is in the hands of people who hate America and hate Christianity. Do you remember when the Clinton administration was bribed by defence contractors, into permitting the transfer of US missile technology to China? China may attack America one day, with American missile technology. I am also opposed to selling US arms technology to Islamic regimes such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt. These regimes have turned virulently anti-Israel, and may one day attack Israel using American technology. Israel is the only Middle Eastern nation, that should receive advanced weapons from America, because they are America's only true ally. American national security depends on putting the interests of Americans first, ahead of the corporate profits of defence contractors, who are notorious for bribing administration officials and congressmen.
There is nothing evil about multi-national corporations or capitalism. There is however something evil about any institution big or small using it’s wealth and influence to bribe politicians to force/prevent/incentivise/discourage/etc... free people from purchasing one product or service over another. The evil is not in the capitalism (freedom). It is in the government interference(force).
I think ‘capitalism’ is an evolving word, the same as ‘conservative’ is. When the left tries to demonize something, it often is given a boost in peoples’ minds. Weird, huh?
You know, like a Republic with Democratically elected representation that is limited by some form of written codex or constitution. Maybe tack on a list of basic Rights that that Countries citizens could use as a protected "starter set" of privileges and immunities.
If only we knew of a Country that still ran under such a system...
If you want to throw your money away, then may God have mercy on you.
Please wake up. The Rockefellers were evil personified, in bed with the Reds from the getgo. Hello, the UN is built on Rockefeller property.
Crony capitalism is MONOPOLY capitalism is FASCISM. Any company too big to fail or big enough to sway the market and cause manipulated profit or collude with or extort agreement from competitors to form raw materials and price fixing cartels, should be dismantled. The Federal Reserve, a non governmental banking monopoly needs to be deconstructed ASAP. Capitalism is about COMPETITION where bad ideas get weeded out before they can destroy the economy.
The Price of “Capitalism”
What is American Corporatism?
“Husbands are like fires. They go out if unattended.” — Zsa Zsa Gabor
Much the same rule applies to capitalists. They are in continual competition with circumstances as well as each other, so if allowed to operate without regulation, they will tend to run amok. Importantly, even they realize this, so if they are not regulated, they will automatically seek to gain political power, both for themselves, but also to prevent other capitalists from running amok.
They crave order. Not chaos and anarchy, and not micromanagement. But the healthy middle between those extremes.
The 20th Century demonstrated this very well. First, the communists tried to nationalize everything, thinking that government could run things better than capitalists. And this was an *organizational* catastrophe.
Then Fascist economists created the idea of “public-private partnerships”, which had great appeal, and many examples of which still exist. It amounted to government telling corporations what to produce, but then leaving it up to them to figure out *how* to produce it. But this is still too far on the micromanagement side.
The US is still afflicted with examples of both of these models, as well as the extremes of micromanagement and the extreme of chaotic, anarchic capitalism.
The reason that the law affords human rights to corporations goes back to the pre-war Lincoln administration, when states tried to exploit national companies, especially the railroads, that did business through them. Today, however, it has become the fundamental core of business law.
Eventually, it will probably need a constitutional amendment to create corporate rights as “separate and distinct” from human rights and the Bill of Rights.
By the turn of the Century, capitalist competition had become so fierce that monopolization (the ‘Trusts’) had become a major problem, so government had to intervene to bust up such cartels. But it took from almost the start of the 19th Century for things to get this bad.
Today it is still a problem, with “oligopolies”, like big media, exploiting their cartel position to foul up the marketplace.
It is ironic, I suppose, that Al Gore has come out to proclaim that corporations should not report on a quarterly basis, as it makes it too easy for investors to figure out and dump when they are scams. Such as the scams he generates.
Yeah, just another evil capitalist hypocrite.
Capitalism is the economic system that is compatible with natural rights. When a country is a threat to the natural rights of America (China), or a group has declared war against America (Moslems), America has the perfect right to use force to protect its natural rights by limiting the economic freedom of companies that do business with its enemies. Also, when an American company does business with America’s enemies, it forfeits its economic freedom.
By the way, bribery and corruption can be and are rife in almost all systems and have to do with corrupt people not something inherently bad about our capitalist system.
In fact, IMO, many of the government controls put on our system have made it more susceptible to bribery and corruption.
Which corporation does this? How do they force it? I missed the news coverage where the Coca Cola SWAT team dressed in red kicked in the door of some unsuspecting family and made them consume the Coke. For a corporation to use force they need a partner with a gun (govt). The American people are to blame when force is used because we have provided the gun to the multi-national corporation.
they have no loyalty to the USA or any local community
Nor should they. They should have loyalty to their share holders and board of directors who should in turn have loyalty to the USA or their local community. If they don't they should be publicly held to account for the actions of the organization they are profiting from.
They fund the Democrats and the Washington elites. They are the reason we cannot get honorable men elected.
The INDIVIDUAL within the organization responsible for doing this has done something against the tenets of liberty and free markets. The POLITICIAN accepting the bribe has done something immoral. The PEOPLE who elected the POLITICIAN did something unwise.
Multi-nationals are evil and do no good
There are many multi-national corporations which have done wonderful things ranging from curing diseases, advances in science, advances in agriculture, advances in communications, etc...There are also those INDIVIDUALS who run multi-national corporations who immorally use the power of the organization to exert force over free men. These people, the politicians who provide the guns and the fools that vote them into office are the bad guys.
Well, ignorance and a blind eye to what’s going on is Rush’s position, too.
Nope "capitalism" isn't dangerous.
What is dangerous is when Government tries to make "Capitalism" "fair"!
You know what, I never thought of it like that before. Good point. Never mind what I said before.
“one class possesses the means of production”
Problem with that concept is that ANYONE can owns means of production. Sure, class distinctions seem apparent when talking very large scale production, but the distinction is position on a continuous spectrum and not an either/or. Any prole can start producing with his bare hands, leveraging his work to acquire more, and so produce more. Many a prole has, as a result of hard work, unexpectedly found himself “The Man” while railing against “The Man” along the way.
Those who object to capitalism as class warfare do not understand this.
Yale was founded using the money plundered from innocent people. It is named after the plunderer who was also a criminal and who donated plundered wealth in order to get the university named after him.
That’s why the author says:
America never had a proletariat.
In that case, America could not have been a capitalist country.
Communism, in reality, is just another variation of Capitalism, in which Capital is centralized in the hands of the State.
I remember the quote from Arthur Jensen in the movie, “Network”, when he dressed down Howard Beale...
“What do you think the Russians talk about in their Councils of State? Karl Marx? They pull out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, and minimax solutions and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments just like we do.”