- Capitalism and Alternatives -

The view from the priveledged seat of Walter

Posted by: The Everett Citizen ( IWW, OBU ) on January 15, 1998 at 18:05:14:

In Reply to: There are no Alternatives to Capitalism posted by Walter Prytulak on January 15, 1998 at 14:34:56:

Walter:
: A gun without a bullet is a toy. An ideology, a political system, a set of ethics, without the power to push it down peopleÆs throats, is a word-play, a fiction, a fantasy, or just simply an entertainment. All ideas, all religious or secular ideologies, and all systems which end with the suffix æ-ismÆ fall into this category.

EC:
A gun without a bullet is still a gun. Ask anyone who has robbed a bank (or been robbed) with an unloaded gun. But I think that the point of this paragraph is that no system can be implimented without force, excepting, of course, capitalism, which is the only system that can possibly exist where force isn't necessary to prop it up. Is this what you meant by this paragraph? Please correct me if I'm wrong about this assumption.

Then consider that the US, as cheif capitalism supporter, has more guns, tanks, bombs, nukes, grenades, mines, submarines, warships, planes, missiles, mortars, artilliary pieces than anyone else in the world, as well as a larger percentage of its population in prison than any other nation, and tell us again that capitalism is freedom without force.

Walter:
: Simon Kongshoj described Communism as: "Not just a political system, but a complete philosophy, with a set of ethics ( e.g. a necessity ethics[?]), a socio-economic theory and a metaphysical theory (materialism). To ram this mouthful into unreceptive skulls of the unsuspecting populace would require a dictatorship on the scale of the now defunct Soviet Union, with cadres of political komissars, secret police, informers, political rallies, cangaroo courts, summary executions, public confessions, forced labour camps, etc.

EC:
What Simon has described requires voluntary solidarity, an awakening of concience, and a common vision, based on freedom and equality of all. I have read quotes from Simon condemning the things you describe above. The things described above are as much a part of the capitalist regimes of today as they were of soviet russia. You just have the luxury of being insulated to the realities of slave camps, etc., today.

Walter:
What is so nice about it (capital;ism) is the fact that it is not a philosophy. Its ethic is simple: buy what you want and sell that which other people want to buy.

EC:
Unless it is pot or sex or anything that competes with the entrenched conglomerates, who want to be the sole sellers of everything.

Walter:
Capitalism leaves you in peace. It does not creep under your skin or between your bed sheets. It does not try to indoctrinate you with some weird ideas; it does not try to make you worship this or that deity, to love anything or anybody, to wear a constant grin on your face to prove that you are happy, to be more greedy, or less so, etc. It gives no hoot about womanÆs hair showing from under her scarf or whether the male assumes a missionary position in his amorous advances.

EC:
You must have never seen a TV, billboard, or magazine in you life.

Walter:
: Now adding to the above freedom the profusion and the variety of consumer goods, the high standard of living, the ease of getting around and communicating with others, and above all, the ease of getting out and moving to the greener pastures elsewhere on this planet, one can come only come to one conclusion: We live in the best of all possible worlds and there are no Alternatives to Capitalism.

EC:
You are seeing this only from the side of the beneficiary. Freedom is not freedom when it only applies to a powerful minority. Then it is better called priveledge. Capitalism cannot continue without the slave labor you conveniently overlook. Without it, the capitalists would themselves have to work, and "we just can't have that, can we !?!?!?"

Walter:
However, Capitalism could be made even prettier if the ugly blemish was removed from its face, i.e. the insistence that a man who did not work should not be allowed to eat, and then finding all sorts of excuses to feed him.

EC:
Now your sounding like one of us, except you probably aren't talking about the idle rich. Remove the "blemish" of people getting something for nothing, and capitalism wont be capitalism anymore! It is based on the premise that others will do the work of the priveledged.

Mike, The Everett Citizen


Follow Ups:

None.

The Debating Room Post a Followup