[OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
Geo... I think you ment to say the Canadians are currently running an interesting soceitetal expirement in which they are attempting to bring in aspects of a capitalist economic system, while maintaining the totalitarian hold of the government.

No, the Candians are attempting to bring aspects of their socialist totalitarian regime into America and undermine our system.

[Narrew]

Originally posted by geoschmo:
No, the Candians are attempting to bring aspects of their socialist totalitarian regime into America and undermine our system.

ACK!!! Are you saying there is some other goverment (other than the US) that is attempting to subvert the way of life in another country?

For shame, I thought we had a monopoly on that.

[tbontob]

Well, we did think of burning the White House again.

But our feasibility study seemed to show it wouldn't succeed.

So we decided on alternate means to undermine your system.

Those damned pseudo-Vikings to the North, eh?

[Alpha Kodiak]

It can be argued that the U.S. has moved away from capitalism toward socialism in a number of areas. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing makes for a significant debate. I do know that in a number of industries (such as healthcare billing, where I am working right now) small companies are struggling to deal with tons of government red tape (strangely in the guise of "Administrative Simplification") that threaten to choke them out.

While government regulation can be a good thing as it protects consumers from large corporations whose only goal is to make money at anyone's expense, it can also choke out small companies that would otherwise provide competition to the larger companies that can afford to deal with the red tape. There is a fine line between too much and too little regulation, and it is a line that we struggle with, missing on both sides of the line from time to time.

[geoschmo]

D, seriously though, what you don't get is that that is not culture. It's not American culture that is infecting you. It's simply a rampant consumerism. It's one of the unfortunate side effect that come from living in a succesful capitalist economy where your needs are satisfied to the point where your baser desires start coming out to the forefront.

There is nothing inherantly American about it, and it's not culture. Many people in America object to it as much as you do. They attempt to remove as much of that junk from their life and live in a simpler, more "natural" way.

I believe it's called "minimalism". Although you know what that is don't you? It's in your web page banner.

Geoschmo

[ May 15, 2003, 12:06: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

[dogscoff]

Geo- yes, it is rampant consumerism that I object to, but you have to admit that the US is the champion of market-forces-worship, unchecked capitalism and rampant consumerism. Sure, us Europeans invented modern capitalism, but I'd say you Americans were the ones to first take it to the dangerous extremes we see today. The US are the ones who have ridden the capitalist wave most effectively over the Last half-century and that's why there is a McDonalds in every town on the planet rather than a Dog & Duck pub. (Not that I'd want there to be.)

As for your minimalist lifestyle- although I would name it differently- yes, my gf and I try to live our lives as much like that as we can. It's not easy, but we try to minimise packaging and waste, conserve energy, purchase responsibly and we recycle just about everything (metal, pLastic, paper, glass, compost).

I see it as the most effective (legal) way of opposing rampant consumerism that we can possibly fit into our lifestyle. Hopefully more and more people will do the same and eventually things will change.

[ May 15, 2003, 12:44: Message edited by: dogscoff ]

[teal]

Regarding the statements made by several people that "18th century capitalism was somehow more pure and the free sort of capitalism".

This is an anti-historical myth in my opinion. There never was such a time (although references to this time before FDR came and screwed everything up with the New Deal run rife in the current right wing story about the history of the United States). For starters it was not a free capitalistic society because many parts of it relied on slavery. You could argue that this ideal society existed in the western parts of the United States where "man lived by the sweat of his brow alone". But, as I mentioned very briefly earlier, DeSoto showed that this was not actually the case. Man lived on this land, yes, and improved it. But he was not legally allowed to benefit from that land until *after* a very large number of people had already homesteaded. The first homesteaders were breaking the law and were quite lucky that government didn't invalidate their claims. It could easily have gone the other way.

Geo: It sounds like we agree on quite a bit. My apologies for making an unfair assumption at the beginning of the discussion, but I kind of had to in order to get the ball rolling.

Regarding Totalitarianism and Capitalism: IMO the best modern example of this is not China, but Singapore (an extremely successful country by almost any measure you care to make, yet you can get caned for chewing gum on the subway). Although I hope, as you folks do, that these societies will eventually collapse, the historical record is not so encouraging in places. Totalitarianism has a way of sticking around even when people are given a little bit of freedom.

An interesting, although slightly tangential, point is that made by Robert Fogel in his work which won him the 1993 Nobel Prize in economics. He argued that, contrary to what most people are taught in school, the slave economy of the Negro south was in fact very very effecieint and perhaps the most effecient in the world. Sobering news indeed for those who believe that the be all and end all of economics, and by extension society, is to make things as effecient as humanly possible.

Cheers!

Teal

Edit: Fogel's work is contreversial to say the least. Make up your own mind about it.

[ May 16, 2003, 19:17: Message edited by: teal ]

[Unknown_Enemy]

(What's the english name for the country where Polish people live? Is it Polen? Will have to google it later!))

Poland.

[dogscoff]

We are greedy by our nature.

A system such as capitalism assumes this truth and uses the inherrant nature of the species as a check and balance agaisnt it's baser tendancies.

This is an argument I have heard many times before in favour of capitalism and I don't like it. It's cynical. You're saying that there is something inherently selfish and greedy about humankind. You acknowledge that this a bad thing, but then say "oh well, there's nothing we can do about it, so we might as well give in to it." If humanity was inherently biased toward rape and murder, would you back a system which encouraged and exploited it?
Now I'm not saying we should ignore our flaws, but I don't like the idea of pandering to them. Surely we should be striving to eliminate such defects, to better ourselves. We can never do that as long as we are holding them up for worship.

Just my thoughts.

18th century capitalism was somehow
...
There never was such a time

There was never such a time as the 18th Century? That explains a lot...

Sobering news indeed for those who believe that the be all and end all of economics, and by extension society,

I think the belief that what is good for the economy is necessarily good for society is the cause of many of today's problems.

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by dogscoff:

This is an argument I have heard many times before in favour of capitalism and I don't like it. It's cynical. You're saying that there is something inherently selfish and greedy about humankind. You acknowledge that this a bad thing, but then say "oh well, there's nothing we can do about it, so we might as well give in to it." If humanity was inherently biased toward rape and murder, would you back a system which encouraged and exploited it?

Cynical? Perhaps a little, but mostly just realistic. I won't go as far as Gordon Gecko and say "Greed is good.", but it's not always a bad thing either. It can be a powerful force for good is channeled into productive endeavors. It's what motivates us to provide for ourselves and our families. It's what pushes us to better ourselves.

You don't have to pander to your basest instincts, but you can't fight a basic component of human nature. If people don't have the opportunity to benefit from their labors, then they are going to do the mimimum amount necceseary to get by. That's just how it is D. Admitting it may be cynical, but trying to change it is naieve.

And as far as your other point, I believe man IS inherantly biased towards rape and murder. But that is more of a philisophical discussion then an economic one. We have to fight against those tendancies as individuals and as a soceity because they are counter productive. You can't channel those instincts towards individual fulfillment and the greater good the way you can with an emotion like greed. That's why we need laws and governments to begin with. To protect us form those members of the species who cannot control those aspects within themselves.

Geoschmo

[ May 16, 2003, 14:03: Message edited by: geoschmo ]