There’s no doubt about it. You’re right about that. We need to be very careful not to give the government power to persecute.
Maybe it all goes to education. I think if Americans were taught about forming corporations, some of the ways money gets raised (sale of shares, borrowing), and small business entrepreneurs were given some serious …
There’s no doubt about it. You’re right about that. We need to be very careful not to give the government power to persecute.
Maybe it all goes to education. I think if Americans were taught about forming corporations, some of the ways money gets raised (sale of shares, borrowing), and small business entrepreneurs were given some serious tax cuts, we might see some movement in a good direction. As much as I am hostile to corporatism, I do believe the business corporation is a great and powerful invention that can be leveraged for good.
There are also ham-handed ways of doing it like giving the government more power to intervene in private interests, but I think more along your lines, that could lead to violence and dictatorship if not managed incredibly well.
I think this especially is important to remember "I do agree that these are not problems inherent to capitalism as a system, but there’s the thing as a system and then there’s how it plays out in practice, and I suppose my true gripe and fear is how it has played out in practice."
I think "communists" usually judge "capitalism" by it's reality vs its ideal and "capitalists" do the same for "communism". In fact all humans basically do a version of this this constantly, judging "their side" in terms of theory and ideals and criticizing the other by it's reality. It's only natural but when it's at play neither side is actually capable of communicating.
And tbh I think that's what most of these situations are fundamentally about, communication, and I don't think this article is actually very helpful at fostering more understanding. Many of the things he is pointing out are silly and ridiculous of course, but there are also many situations where there are legitimate gripes being expressed and just because they used the shorthand of "capitalism" in their "opening salvo" instead of whatever more specifically accurate verbiage the author would prefer, he uses it as a ammo to ridicule them and justify his self righteousness. What's the point?
There’s no doubt about it. You’re right about that. We need to be very careful not to give the government power to persecute.
Maybe it all goes to education. I think if Americans were taught about forming corporations, some of the ways money gets raised (sale of shares, borrowing), and small business entrepreneurs were given some serious tax cuts, we might see some movement in a good direction. As much as I am hostile to corporatism, I do believe the business corporation is a great and powerful invention that can be leveraged for good.
There are also ham-handed ways of doing it like giving the government more power to intervene in private interests, but I think more along your lines, that could lead to violence and dictatorship if not managed incredibly well.
Loved this thread!
I think this especially is important to remember "I do agree that these are not problems inherent to capitalism as a system, but there’s the thing as a system and then there’s how it plays out in practice, and I suppose my true gripe and fear is how it has played out in practice."
I think "communists" usually judge "capitalism" by it's reality vs its ideal and "capitalists" do the same for "communism". In fact all humans basically do a version of this this constantly, judging "their side" in terms of theory and ideals and criticizing the other by it's reality. It's only natural but when it's at play neither side is actually capable of communicating.
And tbh I think that's what most of these situations are fundamentally about, communication, and I don't think this article is actually very helpful at fostering more understanding. Many of the things he is pointing out are silly and ridiculous of course, but there are also many situations where there are legitimate gripes being expressed and just because they used the shorthand of "capitalism" in their "opening salvo" instead of whatever more specifically accurate verbiage the author would prefer, he uses it as a ammo to ridicule them and justify his self righteousness. What's the point?