Capitalism is EVIL.

[Pete in Panama]

...How would we translate the sentiment "Capitalism is Evil" into other terms that still captures the sentiment trying to be expressed? Might the sentiment be "Capitalism, in any shape or form, is harmful to humanity."? Or if we want to emphasize morality in the equation, might we say "Capitalism is irreconcilable with my (person who is making this claim) moral and ethical system."? Or maybe it is enough to say, "Capitalism is really, really, bad."

Regardless, I personally do not share such sentiments, however they may be expressed.

That's what I was getting at, if the intended meaning of "evil" is understood but you find it unacceptable, then you should be finding this thread unacceptable. Are you?

 

[Pete in Panama]

No.

I've nothing to add.

sounds like we're done then. Cheers!

 

[Pete in Panama]

...I have worked most of my life for Local Governments, which are also not for profit, but for service to the community it represents

Regards Tony

So you've been employed --selling your labor to the government at a wage that both you and them found acceptable,, and your employee was not interested in a profit.

You see how profit is not essential to a free market?

 

[MikeF]

That's what I was getting at, if the intended meaning of "evil" is understood but you find it unacceptable, then you should be finding this thread unacceptable. Are you?

I think I said evil, a concept out of religious myth, wasn't a thing. You seemed to be of the opinion that it was a concept born out of atheism.

I could be completely out in left field, but it has always been my impression that evil describe actions of an actor with malevolent intent who's actions that are characterized as evil are those that are in extreme opposition to what is considered the good of "God" or some other positive entity/force.

I have no problem with folks being unhappy with or in complete opposition to capitalism and no problem with a thread in which to air those sentiments.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

My opinion is that capitalism is okay as long as it's practiced ethically. The problem is that it's often not.

Just like any other economic system ever come up with.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So you've been employed --selling your labor to the government at a wage that both you and them found acceptable,, and your employee was not interested in a profit.

You see how profit is not essential to a free market?

Pete. I understand this, there is many frames of references in regards to Capitalism, it's good and bad influences.

That is why the Baha'i Writings talk about a combination of the best of the systems, while dropping the pernicious. Abdul'baha has many great suggestions.

Regards Tony

 

[Pete in Panama]

I think I said evil, a concept out of religious myth, wasn't a thing. You seemed to be of the opinion that it was a concept born out of atheism.

--and things are not always as they seem. Perhaps you got that impression when you overlooked my saying...

... in reality the problem of evil is not contingent upon denominational belief...

I could be completely out in left field, but it has always been my impression that evil describe actions of an actor with malevolent intent who's actions that are characterized as evil are those that are in extreme opposition to what is considered the good of "God" or some other positive entity/force.

I have no problem with folks being unhappy with or in complete opposition to capitalism and no problem with a thread in which to air those sentiments.

Interesting, you're beginning every paragraph w/ the word "I". OK, if we're focusing here on you I'll add that you're doing a wonderful job and I wish you a pleasant day.

Cheers

 

[Pete in Panama]

Pete. I understand this, there is many frames of references in regards to Capitalism, it's good and bad influences.

That is why the Baha'i Writings talk about a combination of the best of the systems, while dropping the pernicious. Abdul'baha has many great suggestions.

Regards Tony

A simple search shows that Baha'u'llah and Abdul'baha never mentioned or talked about capitalism. However, they did talk a lot about markets. This is why I avoid the loaded word and stick to what I understand, namely buying/selling/exchanging.

A side point, when it comes to exploitation I'd have thought that was something happening much more under regimes that were at war w/ something they called capitalism, but that's their partisan politics & I'm a bit lost there.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

A simple search shows that Baha'u'llah and Abdul'baha never mentioned or talked about capitalism. However, they did talk a lot about markets. This is why I avoid the loaded word and stick to what I understand, namely buying/selling/exchanging.

A side point, when it comes to exploitation I'd have thought that was something happening much more under regimes that were at war w/ something they called capitalism, but that's their partisan politics & I'm a bit lost there.

Yes they do not name the systems we embrace, they give the principles we need to follow.

The 1985 document, the Promise of World Peace by the Universal House of Justice includes the topic.

".....The time has come when those who preach the dogmas of materialism, whether of the east or the west, whether of capitalism or socialism, must give account of the moral stewardship they have presumed to exercise. Where is the “new world” promised by these ideologies? Where is the international peace to whose ideals they proclaim their devotion? Where are the breakthroughs into new realms of cultural achievement produced by the aggrandizement of this race, of that nation or of a particular class? Why is the vast majority of the world’s peoples sinking ever deeper into hunger and wretchedness when wealth on a scale undreamed of by the Pharaohs, the Caesars, or even the imperialist powers of the nineteenth century is at the disposal of the present arbiters of human affairs?

Most particularly, it is in the glorification of material pursuits, at once the progenitor and common feature of all such ideologies, that we find the roots which nourish the falsehood that human beings are incorrigibly selfish and aggressive. It is here that the ground must be cleared for the building of a new world fit for our descendants.

That materialistic ideals have, in the light of experience, failed to satisfy the needs of mankind calls for an honest acknowledgement that a fresh effort must now be made to find the solutions to the agonizing problems of the planet......"

Regards Tony

 

[MikeF]

Interesting, you're beginning every paragraph w/ the word "I". OK, if we're focusing here on you I'll add that you're doing a wonderful job and I wish you a pleasant day.

Oh dear. we don't seem to be communicating very well. I was responding to your query about whether I found this thread unacceptable, so yes, I assumed your question was focused on me and specifically my attitude regarding the thread.

Wishing you a pleasant day as well.

 

[Pete in Panama]

...That materialistic ideals have, in the light of experience, failed to satisfy the needs of mankind calls for an honest acknowledgement that a fresh effort must now be made to find the solutions to the agonizing problems of the planet......"

It would be so easy to leave it there and conclude that spirituality is good and materialism is bad. That's an old world western dichotomy. Taking the Sacred Texts as a whole --while we do find cautions about excessive materialism-- we also find not only a prohibition of monasticism but we also come across dozens of quotes on the requirement of and benefits of "material means".

Maybe our pitfall here is wording. Monasticism is bad yet monasteries are good. Materialism is bad yet material is good.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Jesus certainly didn't appear to be a fan of it.

Jesus didn't think you should save for tomorrow, either, so I'd not be keen on following his financial or economic advice.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's because capitalism is inherently amoral (if not outright immoral). It needs an external, ethical control.

Every economic system is defined amorally.
Same goes for science.
Only religion is where morality is prescribed.
(And where it's practiced the least.)

I'll go with that good ole atheistic capitalism.
It has the greatest likelihood of being moral.
Or just less evil than all alternatives.

 

[vulcanlogician]

I don't think that capitalism is necessarily evil. I think it's problematic. Evil suggests that that it has built into it some basic negative or harmful qualities. (And it does)... but this is only half the story. It also has some serious upsides. It generates a ton of wealth and infrastructure in the societies where it is practiced.

The problem is, slowly but surely, it collects all the wealth in one small portion of society.

I wouldn't call capitalism moral OR immoral.

But any criticisms people have of it, any reason it ought to be regulated or revolted against-- THOSE THINGS are all morally motivated.

Most Marxists actually disagree with me on that last part. But I they're wrong. (The analytical Marxists agree with me though!) Even Marx himself, who rejected the idea that his system was morally motivated, slipped up and used "justice" as a talking point. For many reasons, I think Marxism is motivated by moral principles. And I wish more Marxists would see it that way. Because, imo, it's fine to endorse a system of economics for moral reasons. That's why I'm a Marxist in the first place!

 

[Heyo]

Every economic system is defined amorally.

Communism is supposed to be moral, in that it should be more just/equal than other systems. Those are moral values. (That it hasn't ever been in practise is another point.)

 

[Revoltingest]

Communism is supposed to be moral, in that it should be more just/equal than other systems.

If you look at the definition of it, morality isn't even mentioned.
That's a value that you attribute to it. Ironically, it just never
works out that way...every implementation of socialism/communism
resulted in hideously immoral regimes. It's just dangerously too
much power to give government.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Every economic system is defined amorally.
Same goes for science.
Only religion is where morality is prescribed.
(And where it's practiced the least.)

I'll go with that good ole atheistic capitalism.
It has the greatest likelihood of being moral.
Or just less evil than all alternatives.

My own view, frankly, is that hatred of capitalism is primarily an issue of envy.

Yes, it is true, capitalism (like every other human creation) needs some rules and constraints. Not willy-nilly, but based on the ability to show how such constraints would prevent the damage that a focus only on "increasing shareholder value" can manifestly do.

But the envy comes in when so many of us see that some people can get a lot richer than most of the rest of us. Well, it is my opinion that Bill Gates (for example) put in thousands of hours of efforts creating Microsoft in competition with (mostly) IBM. And then he brilliantly got them to buy into his small system operating system, rather than be bothered building their own. His own effort, and negotiating ability, allowed him for many years to have a near monopoly. (Later, when IBM tried building OS2 to compete with Windows, they failed miserably.) Gates is very rich -- and he earned it. I don't begrudge it to him.

He's only one example, but there are many others, where people used their creativity, their intelligence, their hard work, their ability to accept risk and invest in their own work, have made them likewise rich. (Then, of course, there are the one's like Trump who inherited tons, squandered a lot, and used legal trickery to salvage himself -- but no system is going to prevent the cheating outliers.)

Envy is a terrible reason to not like something that works, on the whole, so well.

 

[Heyo]

If you look at the definition of it, morality isn't even mentioned.
That's a value that you attribute to it. Ironically, it just never
works out that way...every implementation of socialism/communism
resulted in hideously immoral regimes. It's just dangerously too
much power to give government.

We agree on that one.
We don't agree that power should also not be given to the capital.

 

[Revoltingest]

We don't agree that power should also not be given to the capital.

I don't know what that means.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Capitalism: "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit." -- Oxford Languages

In capitalist systems not everyone works for the government. In any form of capitalism there exist alternatives to working for the government. Individuals may participate in trade, make deals, sign contracts.

Corporations are not necessarily part of capitalism, and you can have capitalism without corporations.