According to Wikipedia:
Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system and competitive markets. In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investments are determined by every owner of wealth, property or production ability in financial and capital markets, whereas prices and the distribution of goods and services are mainly determined by competition in goods and services markets.
How we define capitalism tends to relate to where we are on the political spectrum. On the right, capitalism tends to be defined exclusively by the dominance of private property within our economic relations. This often comes with the assumption that property and individual freedom are directly linked and free markets are built on voluntary relations so that capitalism cannot be held responsible for the evils of slavery, colonialism or fascism. On the left, capitalism is defined as a socio-economic system in which there is class rule by a capitalist class and so is compatible with a degree of public ownership, deficit spending, government regulation and intervention. Marxists hold capitalism responsible for its actions as a class, as a socio-economic system and blame capitalists for fascism, wars of territorial expansion, the genocide and enslavement of indigenous people and the transformation of self-governing peoples in to colonial territories to control resources (including people themselves).
Often those on the right tend to say that the problem with contemporary politics is that there is too much socialism by which they mean government ownership and control. The solution they suggest is to increase the level of privatisation, deregulate markets and business and reduce both taxes and spending by government. Those of the centre-left sort of agree, but insist that there needs to be more government ownership and control to avert crises and to reduce the symptoms of decay which could ultimately causes major social conflicts and revolutionary upheaval.
By contrast, those on the far left argue that even with state intervention in the economy, it is not possible to avert crises of over production, poverty, unemployment and war. These are simply features of the capitalist mode of production which operate through objective laws in which the pursuit of profit culminates in the anarchy of competition in production between individuals, companies and ultimately (capitalist) governments competing over resources between various states in wars.
Again, how we define capitalism defines how we think about it's future. Many of the right will insist that capitalism is natural, either as a fixed product of human nature (even sanctified by god as a moral order), or else the culmination of a biological instinct towards selfishness, egotism and personal profit and the evolutionary struggle for resources. On the left however, capitalism is seen as an exploiting society riddled with class conflicts and social antagonisms, built on exploitation and destined to fail under the weight of the social conflicts it creates and the way these lead to irrational patterns of mismanagement in production, driven by profit-maximising, competition or the lack there of such as economic crises, environmental degradation and highly profitable but wasteful and destructive armaments industries. The far left argues that capitalism is but a phase of human history and that profit and private property are not the eternal products of human nature or god, but simply the most convenient arrangements within a class society on a given development of technology, science and the organisation of production.
The video below presents a Marxist position on the definition of capitalism and sets out how it affects our perceptions of the legitimacy and justness of capitalism as a socio-economic system and evaluate it's future. (it may be heavy on Marxist terminology, but it reflects such views on capitalism fairly well.)
The power of these definition is enormous. An ideological struggle is waged to define capitalism and then to determine its legitimacy and whether it is going to last forever or faces ultimate collapse. Is China a Communist State or a Capitalist one? Were the Nazis Socialist tyrants or architects of a capitalist reaction? Is America's problem that it has become too "socialist" and needs greater deregulation and privatisation or that it isn't "socialist" enough with nationalisation, regulation, central planning and even violent revolution?
What do you think? How do you define capitalism? And do you believe it matters and effects how you see the world and behave within it? Do you think capitalism is the natural order or a historical phase that is destined to be overcome by a new socio-economic system?
Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit. Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system and competitive markets. In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investments are determined by every owner of wealth, property or production ability in financial and capital markets, whereas prices and the distribution of goods and services are mainly determined by competition in goods and services markets.
How we define capitalism tends to relate to where we are on the political spectrum. On the right, capitalism tends to be defined exclusively by the dominance of private property within our economic relations. This often comes with the assumption that property and individual freedom are directly linked and free markets are built on voluntary relations so that capitalism cannot be held responsible for the evils of slavery, colonialism or fascism. On the left, capitalism is defined as a socio-economic system in which there is class rule by a capitalist class and so is compatible with a degree of public ownership, deficit spending, government regulation and intervention. Marxists hold capitalism responsible for its actions as a class, as a socio-economic system and blame capitalists for fascism, wars of territorial expansion, the genocide and enslavement of indigenous people and the transformation of self-governing peoples in to colonial territories to control resources (including people themselves).
Often those on the right tend to say that the problem with contemporary politics is that there is too much socialism by which they mean government ownership and control. The solution they suggest is to increase the level of privatisation, deregulate markets and business and reduce both taxes and spending by government. Those of the centre-left sort of agree, but insist that there needs to be more government ownership and control to avert crises and to reduce the symptoms of decay which could ultimately causes major social conflicts and revolutionary upheaval.
By contrast, those on the far left argue that even with state intervention in the economy, it is not possible to avert crises of over production, poverty, unemployment and war. These are simply features of the capitalist mode of production which operate through objective laws in which the pursuit of profit culminates in the anarchy of competition in production between individuals, companies and ultimately (capitalist) governments competing over resources between various states in wars.
Again, how we define capitalism defines how we think about it's future. Many of the right will insist that capitalism is natural, either as a fixed product of human nature (even sanctified by god as a moral order), or else the culmination of a biological instinct towards selfishness, egotism and personal profit and the evolutionary struggle for resources. On the left however, capitalism is seen as an exploiting society riddled with class conflicts and social antagonisms, built on exploitation and destined to fail under the weight of the social conflicts it creates and the way these lead to irrational patterns of mismanagement in production, driven by profit-maximising, competition or the lack there of such as economic crises, environmental degradation and highly profitable but wasteful and destructive armaments industries. The far left argues that capitalism is but a phase of human history and that profit and private property are not the eternal products of human nature or god, but simply the most convenient arrangements within a class society on a given development of technology, science and the organisation of production.
The video below presents a Marxist position on the definition of capitalism and sets out how it affects our perceptions of the legitimacy and justness of capitalism as a socio-economic system and evaluate it's future. (it may be heavy on Marxist terminology, but it reflects such views on capitalism fairly well.)
The power of these definition is enormous. An ideological struggle is waged to define capitalism and then to determine its legitimacy and whether it is going to last forever or faces ultimate collapse. Is China a Communist State or a Capitalist one? Were the Nazis Socialist tyrants or architects of a capitalist reaction? Is America's problem that it has become too "socialist" and needs greater deregulation and privatisation or that it isn't "socialist" enough with nationalisation, regulation, central planning and even violent revolution?
What do you think? How do you define capitalism? And do you believe it matters and effects how you see the world and behave within it? Do you think capitalism is the natural order or a historical phase that is destined to be overcome by a new socio-economic system?
Last edited:
