Capitalism is incompatible with democracy on philosophical grounds. Give capitalists the freedom to develop fortunes and they will always turn their wealth toward knocking down the pillars of popular sovereignty. Of course Trump, Musk, Putin, Xi, MBS, et. al. are all aligned; of course they are ripping civil society to shreds.
Capitalism is incompatible with democracy on philosophical grounds. Give capitalists the freedom to develop fortunes and they will always turn their wealth toward knocking down the pillars of popular sovereignty. Of course Trump, Musk, Putin, Xi, MBS, et. al. are all aligned; of course they are ripping civil society to shreds.
Let's disregard the emotional language which taints the conversation, because it becomes akin to eschatological arguments.
Without the ability to save and invest your labor (mental and physical) and the fruits of that labor in the expectation of achieving a future return on investment, we would not have progressed beyond the dark ages.
None of us would be alive today, much less sit in the safety and comfort of a arm house, looking at a screen, with a full belly, wearing decent clothing, and pounding on a keyboard, or touching that screen as we pontificate, kvetch about a system that made all of this possible
Capitalism is indeed compatible with Democracy, it just needs to be restrained, everything human needs to be restrained, without a countervailing force there is no progress and we are susceptible to strongman rule.
Here is the thing, in 1607 a bunch of capitalists, pooled their resources and invested in something called the Virginia Company of London, they prevailed upon the governing authority (King James) to sanction them by issuing a charter that gave them a monopoly, to venture forth and exploit the New world for silver and gold
That charter was the first of three, the last in 1619 recognized that this commercial venture was capable of self governance, and the investors, the land owners, the patent holders, elected their own representative to a body called the House of Burgess. Burg being a Saxon word for fort, as the early settlement was a series of forts up and down the James and Elizabeth Rivers and their tributaries like the Appomattox.
In 1624 King James revoked the Charter and made the adventure a colony. He revoked it because, unlike it's promise, it was not delivering in gold or silver, just that stinky, smelly weed which he abhorred called tobacco, and it was having a lot of problem with the natives, as the adventurers were exploiting and double dealing them, They rebelled in 1622 in a surprise attack by the Powhatan Indians, we know as the Jamestown massacre, which was a big motivating factor in revoking the charter..
The point here s that the USA exists because of a capitalist venture, and within that venture arose the first notion of a democratic self governance. Not even England had such a system, they had a Parliament with a house of Lords, advising the King, but that is hardly self governance or what we would call a democracy.
The problem unfortunately lies in the concept of a democracy. From the Greek word meaning the people or the mob as in demonstration.
Thomas Jefferson, though an anti federalist, thus anti unitary executive or king, never the less was not enamored of a democracy in which the common man had a voice.
He had visited a business meeting of a Baptist Church in Danville, Pittsylvania Co, VA and was alarmed and disgusted with the disorder, anarcy, mayhem that he witnessed in a church.
His idea of a democracy was a Democratic Republic and so he named his political party, a Republic because a Republic is a rule by wise men, not the "rabble", in theAthenian Republic people with a vested interest in the welfare and prosperity of the state, were the ones that cast a vote,
In the Roman Republic the plebes had a vote and a say on law making, but that eroded over time, and i was the patricians, the Senatorial class that actually ruled. The plebes would vote for a senator, who was of the hereditary patrician class of property owners, over time a middle class emerged the equites, from which we have equestrian, but they were still middle class property owners.
And on that basis, with Rome as a guide, our forefathers were schooled in Latin and Greek and studied Latin literature., they set about creating our government .
In my walk down history's lane I neglected to mention that, save for the slave owners in Virginia and the Carolinas, the northern merchants were capitalists, one and all especially Benjamin Franklin.
So it is Capitalists that actually created our democracy. So not incompatible at all.
I know Daniel. I've said many times that Capitalism and Communism are economic theories, actually they are belief systems, Anything that ends in an ism is a belief system.
I've also said that Capitalism and Communism can exist within a form of government.
Words that end in cy like Democracy, autocracy, are forms of government.
China is a uniparty autocracy, it has a particular form of communism, that permits capitalistic investment and entrepreneurship.
So if capitalists created (recreated) democracy, with which they are compatible, why are capitalists destroying it now? Could it be that capitalists are gods, and destroying what they create is their prerogative? If so, I stand corrected.
You are not corrected and it is not so simple. but people routinely destroy that which they build.
Democracy served them, until it didn't.
Hitler's Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, said:
"It will always remain one of democracy's best jokes that it provided its deadly enemies with the means by which it was destroyed."
Quoted in Richard Evans, "The Coming of the Third Reich", p. 451.
There is truth in that. OBL made the statement, that "we will use your democratic freedoms, to destroy you".
Sacrilized free speech, empowers those that would destroy free speech.
Witness Musk and Shitter.
Free speech for me, but not for thee, and there is nothing the the government could do about it, because the 1st Amendment doesn't make speech sacred all it does is say that Congress shall make no law abridging the right to speech and assembly. It says nothing about people, universities, states, counties, municipalities or corporations like Shitter and Facebook
Capitalism is incompatible with democracy on philosophical grounds. Give capitalists the freedom to develop fortunes and they will always turn their wealth toward knocking down the pillars of popular sovereignty. Of course Trump, Musk, Putin, Xi, MBS, et. al. are all aligned; of course they are ripping civil society to shreds.
Let's disregard the emotional language which taints the conversation, because it becomes akin to eschatological arguments.
Without the ability to save and invest your labor (mental and physical) and the fruits of that labor in the expectation of achieving a future return on investment, we would not have progressed beyond the dark ages.
None of us would be alive today, much less sit in the safety and comfort of a arm house, looking at a screen, with a full belly, wearing decent clothing, and pounding on a keyboard, or touching that screen as we pontificate, kvetch about a system that made all of this possible
Capitalism is indeed compatible with Democracy, it just needs to be restrained, everything human needs to be restrained, without a countervailing force there is no progress and we are susceptible to strongman rule.
Here is the thing, in 1607 a bunch of capitalists, pooled their resources and invested in something called the Virginia Company of London, they prevailed upon the governing authority (King James) to sanction them by issuing a charter that gave them a monopoly, to venture forth and exploit the New world for silver and gold
That charter was the first of three, the last in 1619 recognized that this commercial venture was capable of self governance, and the investors, the land owners, the patent holders, elected their own representative to a body called the House of Burgess. Burg being a Saxon word for fort, as the early settlement was a series of forts up and down the James and Elizabeth Rivers and their tributaries like the Appomattox.
In 1624 King James revoked the Charter and made the adventure a colony. He revoked it because, unlike it's promise, it was not delivering in gold or silver, just that stinky, smelly weed which he abhorred called tobacco, and it was having a lot of problem with the natives, as the adventurers were exploiting and double dealing them, They rebelled in 1622 in a surprise attack by the Powhatan Indians, we know as the Jamestown massacre, which was a big motivating factor in revoking the charter..
The point here s that the USA exists because of a capitalist venture, and within that venture arose the first notion of a democratic self governance. Not even England had such a system, they had a Parliament with a house of Lords, advising the King, but that is hardly self governance or what we would call a democracy.
The problem unfortunately lies in the concept of a democracy. From the Greek word meaning the people or the mob as in demonstration.
Thomas Jefferson, though an anti federalist, thus anti unitary executive or king, never the less was not enamored of a democracy in which the common man had a voice.
He had visited a business meeting of a Baptist Church in Danville, Pittsylvania Co, VA and was alarmed and disgusted with the disorder, anarcy, mayhem that he witnessed in a church.
His idea of a democracy was a Democratic Republic and so he named his political party, a Republic because a Republic is a rule by wise men, not the "rabble", in theAthenian Republic people with a vested interest in the welfare and prosperity of the state, were the ones that cast a vote,
In the Roman Republic the plebes had a vote and a say on law making, but that eroded over time, and i was the patricians, the Senatorial class that actually ruled. The plebes would vote for a senator, who was of the hereditary patrician class of property owners, over time a middle class emerged the equites, from which we have equestrian, but they were still middle class property owners.
And on that basis, with Rome as a guide, our forefathers were schooled in Latin and Greek and studied Latin literature., they set about creating our government .
In my walk down history's lane I neglected to mention that, save for the slave owners in Virginia and the Carolinas, the northern merchants were capitalists, one and all especially Benjamin Franklin.
So it is Capitalists that actually created our democracy. So not incompatible at all.
We've addressed this before. At the time the Declaration, the Constitution were argued at Freedom Hall, the fans in the stands were mostly Iriquois. .
Capitalism is not a form of government. US democracy is. We have always had a "mixed" economy.
I know Daniel. I've said many times that Capitalism and Communism are economic theories, actually they are belief systems, Anything that ends in an ism is a belief system.
I've also said that Capitalism and Communism can exist within a form of government.
Words that end in cy like Democracy, autocracy, are forms of government.
China is a uniparty autocracy, it has a particular form of communism, that permits capitalistic investment and entrepreneurship.
So if capitalists created (recreated) democracy, with which they are compatible, why are capitalists destroying it now? Could it be that capitalists are gods, and destroying what they create is their prerogative? If so, I stand corrected.
You are not corrected and it is not so simple. but people routinely destroy that which they build.
Democracy served them, until it didn't.
Hitler's Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, said:
"It will always remain one of democracy's best jokes that it provided its deadly enemies with the means by which it was destroyed."
Quoted in Richard Evans, "The Coming of the Third Reich", p. 451.
There is truth in that. OBL made the statement, that "we will use your democratic freedoms, to destroy you".
Sacrilized free speech, empowers those that would destroy free speech.
Witness Musk and Shitter.
Free speech for me, but not for thee, and there is nothing the the government could do about it, because the 1st Amendment doesn't make speech sacred all it does is say that Congress shall make no law abridging the right to speech and assembly. It says nothing about people, universities, states, counties, municipalities or corporations like Shitter and Facebook
Here is an easter egg for you, the lovers Musk and Trump https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1BjrRePprg/