You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A critique on modern ideologies (Communism/Socialism/Capitalism)
And finally, in capitalism the individual must be willing to submit his will to what can give him more economic gain.
I would disagree with this premise, as I would that capitalism is an 'ideology' (like communism etc).
Capitalism (as a principle) emerged as a dynamic long before humans had speech...
Capitalism is merely borrowing something off another person, and then returning what has been borrowed, with some 'extra' as a 'thank you'...
(in it's most fundamental form).
Submit implies some form of slavery...but this is incorrect .
It is a free will contract.
Good post and historical summation.
In capitalism, people organize themselves around the trade of goods and services. The competition generates a situation in which you can only work in a profitable economic activity, if it is not profitable, you cannot work on it. Assuming that today there could be a free market capitalism, which is not the case, competition and the division of labor would not leave much room for maneuver, people should be organized automatically in a way that generates greater economic profitability, so that both the individual and society would be working to obtain economic profitability, so it follows that the individual puts his will at the disposal of money.
Yes, that's the main reason why capitalism is much more efficient than socialism and communism when it comes to producing, people act voluntarily, but they must understand that people only act voluntarily because they want to make money, I'm sure that many current professions would not exist if people were not willing to do all kinds of activities for money.
In fact, this search for money is what makes capitalism work, Ludwig von Mises explained it, he said that communism and socialism would fail because there was no money in those systems, and without money, and without the need for companies to obtain profitability, the economic calculation would not be possible, which causes the socialist and communist system to fail.
Look at this, unemployment insurance allows people not to accept jobs they consider unworthy, someone with unemployment insurance would not accept a job they don't like, which is why people who criticize the subsidies are opposed to this type of practice, because it is shown by the data that people do not perform jobs that they consider unworthy unless they are very needy. In the purest capitalism, the subsidy does not exist, so you must accept any type of work, even so, people could refuse to perform a certain type of activity, since they can suppose something immoral for them, which is why I say that the most efficient capitalism needs to eliminate any kind of morality, so that people are willing to do the job demanded by market forces without any objection. Consequently, for the purest capitalism human morality is just as harmful as a state law, so it will seek to suppress it, and turn it into someone who pursues material and not moral objectives, which in any case is summarized in money.
I don't mean by this that the free market or capitalism is something negative, the problem is not the free market, the problem is to adopt this system as an ideology or supreme value, and not as an instrument to reach a higher moral objective than the simple production of goods and services.
Greetings, and thanks for your observation!
It cannot be free will as capitalism emerged before you and I were born. As you already mentioned. The contract was not signed by us personally. We can only renew the contract by a conscious will when we think it makes sense. This act of reflecting on where money comes from and what money actually is, can be a really long walk. It's a good point to start, though.
There are those who use the internet and then there are those that get used by the internet as a form of content and/or revenue. One can use capitalism as a function/tool and if that is done, what you are saying is true. But if a person becomes a slave to capitalism, then it's just utilitarianism and @vieira is right.
Austrians see capitalism as a means to an end. This is good. Keynesian see an end in itself. That's why the modern economy is so messed up. People are more interested in protecting the economy and less concerned about how the economy is going to save them. All good things are like nuclear energy. You can do things that were deemed impossible or mess up a little and go all Chernobyl.
I wrote a post on this same topic today.
I agree with your premise that many of the ideas that we have about the market stretch back through antiquity.
However there is also a distinct ideology called "Capitalism" that appeared in the mid 1800s.
The modern ideology of Capitalism is based on the modern logic of Hegel.
A few decades I went to search for the source of the modern ideology of called capitalism. When I realized who was the father of capitalism was, my understanding of modern history changed.