Why capitalism is a great thing

Posted by $ blarman 8 months ago to Philosophy
17 comments | Share | Flag

That's the funny thing. Communism wants everyone to shut up and just tow the line. Capitalism relies on the "squeaky wheel' and makes changes accordingly. And while communists claim they are being "progressive", the truth is the exact opposite.
SOURCE URL: https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/01/22/greedy-businesses-responsible-for-constant-improvements/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTXpRNVpEUmxaRE5rWTJNNCIsInQiOiJqaXlcL0x4eUJwRWF5MVwvU0dUU29lcXVcLzVLMFpsSTFuUTh1aW16RmVwR3p2d0VFS0MwNnpQR1ZcL1diOTl3U1wvY0RtZ0h1amplOEdhRGtOME9KRmlNbDVFZGtJbUtuSU8wcWFOZGpNUVNcL3BYbUdURnV6ZjByUVVQQ1N0YUJFNWxPNiJ9

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ jbrenner 8 months ago
    Progressives see "progressivism" as progressive because it makes them more powerful at our expense. However, please use the word enterprise instead of the Marxist term capitalism. One thing that Ayn Rand was particularly good at was using her terminology very precisely, thereby avoiding the negative connotations of others' terminology.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CaptainKirk 7 months, 2 weeks ago
      Actually, Jordan Peterson has the CLEANEST Explanation of the Left and Right. It may be cognitive bias on my part, but it fits my world view pretty well...

      The right believes in hierarchy and rules. This makes society manageable and predictable. it rewards special talents (IQ, Looks, Grit, Acting, etc)...
      it gives a simple way to compare/contrast, and allows people to move around (no caste systems) based on their effort/impact, etc.

      The left eschews this approach because "muh, fairness"... Not everyone is equally as smart, as good looking, as rich, as whatever... Therefore, the hierarchy leaves behind about 10% of the population (those who CANNOT or WILL NOT submit to rules, etc). Think special needs children (or leftists, there about the same nowadays, just that the latter teach at universities more often, LOL)...

      The problem is that BOTH sides have a point. And Society works best WHEN we Reward BOTH Hierarchy as well as supporting the weakest among us to a degree.

      The next problem is that we KNOW when the RIGHT goes too far... It's obvious. (My famous SHOOT THE POOR and feed them to the next level of poor willing to cook them and dig graves). That's an INSANE proposition, but it fits a hierarchy with rules. Be useful, or be dead/eaten, etc. And what if it is YOUR child...

      But we DO NOT have a good yardstick to know when the LEFT goes too far. Is absolute equality bad? (We know equality of outcome is STUPID, and it is unachievable, but where do we draw the line, and NOT LOOK bad, etc). The reality is that BECAUSE the MEDIA is all Left, they get the better marketing of bad ideas. (They SOUND good, like Gun Safety, but NEVER mean what they say (Gun Confiscation)).

      The progressive label was to replaced the DESTROYED Liberal label. And to create distance from Socialists. It's Word Play. But this is how you sell an uneducated population on a group of ideas that sound good to them, that are FREE to them. (Free Healthcare, Free School, Don't payback your loans, Free Jobs, Free Food, Free Free Free)... And who says NO to free? (the person who is the most educated, which is 32.8% or even half of that).

      So, that's why we had a REPUBLIC. The masses were going to be asses, and the Senate was there to provide the Higher IQ (IMO, before directly elected). The states would protect the erosion of their power by recalling them!

      So, I don't see Progressives as EVIL. They are 99% misguided. And the MEDIA is misguiding them on purpose. Because they are in bed with the Democrat Power Brokers, and know their power will remain as the country dissolves from the Leftist policies. Even in the darkest days of Communism... Russia had News Channels! China has News Channels. And all the better that they are trained to ONLY REPEAT from a predefined script, and really sell it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ 7 months, 2 weeks ago
        One clarification, Woodrow Wilson campaigned heavily to change the associations and definition of "liberal" from its historical basis to a pseudo-equivalency with progressive. Wilson was a progressive and very open about it, but few Americans were fond of the word, preferring the old-school "liberal" instead. In other words, Progressives have been around for at least a century with some arguing it started with Teddy Roosevelt and others with Wilson. But it has only been in the past twenty years that Democrats have self-applied the moniker in their marketing.

        I don't see all Progressives as evil, but the movement definitely is and those at the heart of it aren't ignorant pantywaists. The lamestream media also are not ignorant but rather complicit, though what they purpose to get out of socialism is beyond me given the history of (yellow) journalism in other (socialist) nations...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 25n56il4 7 months, 3 weeks ago
    Well, it may not be the 'greatest' but it is way in front of whatever is in second place.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ mshupe 7 months, 2 weeks ago
      It is the greatest for human beings living on planet earth. Second place would be nihilistic and collectivist. Your statement is a package-deal. Its impossible to put "may not be the greatest" and "in front of second place" in a rational statement. A total copout, moral equivocating, egalitarian pap.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo