Skip to main content

View Diary: Capitalism's moral crisis: The Christian Science Monitor (47 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Marx was pro-capitalism in a way. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    don mikulecky, Munchkn

    So I imagine it was more or less moral to him.

    He was pro-capitalism because he saw it as a necessary, natural forerunner to communism.

    In any case, no nation has ever seen pure capitalism.  We have a very mixed economy.

    "Well, only two kinds of people wear red shoes; and you ain't no Spanish dancer." -- Miguel Ferrer, "In the Groove" (Tales From the Crypt)

    by dov12348 on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 09:59:08 AM PDT

    •  In science we have a similar problem (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kingubu, jj24, dov12348, sfbob, Larsstephens

      People confuse models with reality.  Models are our attempts to gain understanding.  A true scientist knows that the map is not the territory.  The same is true for economic theory, etc.

      An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

      by don mikulecky on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 10:03:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Does the government produce your consumer goods? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      don mikulecky

      does the government produce your food?

      No.

      Capitalism: 1) a system in which exploitation is dependent upon extraction of the surplus generated by wage labor.  2) A system characterized by private ownership of the means of production.

      How pure do you want it?

      "The old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear." -- Gramsci

      by Cassiodorus on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 11:19:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        don mikulecky

        Does the government produce/control/pay for: Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, farm subsidies, art subsidies, regulation of and assistance to business and labor, social security, food stamps, the post office, grants, student assistance, the money supply, taxation, parks system, control of massive amounts of federal lands, space programs, foreign aid, etc. etc. etc. etc.

        So yeah, we're pretty mixed.  

        "Well, only two kinds of people wear red shoes; and you ain't no Spanish dancer." -- Miguel Ferrer, "In the Groove" (Tales From the Crypt)

        by dov12348 on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 12:06:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's not part of the definition -- (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          don mikulecky

          Mere government intervention into the economy, or subsidy of certain sectors of the economy, does not define "socialism."  The early modern economies of England, France, Prussia, and so on, were heavily involved with state subsidy, yet in no sense were these economies "socialist."  In fact, early modern economics had ideologies of its own, which were typically regarded by the advocates of Adam Smith's "laissez-faire" approach mercantilism.  More likely, the later definition of state subsidy of private entities as "socialist" was an attempt to establish guilt-by-association between government provision of services and the supposed evils of "socialism."

          "The old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear." -- Gramsci

          by Cassiodorus on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 12:41:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  getting off track here (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Larsstephens

            the issue of the diary has to do with values not rigid definitions.

            Here's my distinction:  capitalism places more value on profit than it does a fair distribution of the fruits of labor.

            No absolutes just a question of greater emphasis on certain values.  Therein lies the moral question.

            An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

            by don mikulecky on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 12:46:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I never implied we're socialistic. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            don mikulecky

            We're mixed.  Part capitalist, part socialist, part welfare state.  Perhaps we weigh more heavily on the capitalist side.

            "Well, only two kinds of people wear red shoes; and you ain't no Spanish dancer." -- Miguel Ferrer, "In the Groove" (Tales From the Crypt)

            by dov12348 on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 07:04:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Welfare is not "socialistic." (0+ / 0-)

              Public ownership of any part of the means of production is "socialistic."

              "The old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear." -- Gramsci

              by Cassiodorus on Tue Sep 22, 2009 at 08:10:53 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site