Capital is material or intellectual property. Capital is materialism in a sense- pure materialism and exclusive possession/use of matter. Adding an ‘ism’ suffix to capital does make it sound like something other than what it is. Yet capital-ism is nothing more than individuals and collectives going about acquiring capital.
There isn’t an exclusive method, procedure or system for acquiring capital such that it deserves to have an ism all of its own. Without any government existing, without any markets, a frontiersman may acquire capital with hunting and curing meat for the winter, for example. Building a cabin is capital acquisition.
Innumerable ways to allow individuals government facility for building capital (with equal opportunity) may be constructed, invented etc. A system where large banks and networks develop exclusive advantages to own capital in a society is just one bad method amidst zillions of potential systems that people might invent or field as a fundamental template for free market transactions, use of capital etc.
Pure or impure capitalism is thus something of a wrong idea about mankind’s relation to capital. The ownership of capital was a great debate between socialism and people of the free societies that thought of themselves as capitalists. Neither side was too bright regarding political and economic philosophy.
A good example of the destruction of ‘pure capitalism’- capitalism without government intervention- was the government interventions in 2008–2009 to bail out banks and the most rich. Even large automakers were propped up by President Obama instead of being allowed to fail through bankruptcy and liquidation as would occur in ‘pure’ capitalism.
Keeping fossil fuel automakers alive undoubtedly hurt Tesla’s opportunity to become the dominant American automaker with a nation buying Teslas as if they were Model T Fords in the electric field. One day a national electric field may allow motorless ‘cars’ to shuttle about on superconducting lines.
Pure capitalism does not exist once government intervenes to ossify a system of protectionism for the most rich and advantaged players. Then democracy and free markets are ossified and made to serve the most rich without any semblance of an egalitarian economic allocation of resources remaining in existence.
There isn’t an exclusive method, procedure or system for acquiring capital such that it deserves to have an ism all of its own. Without any government existing, without any markets, a frontiersman may acquire capital with hunting and curing meat for the winter, for example. Building a cabin is capital acquisition.
Innumerable ways to allow individuals government facility for building capital (with equal opportunity) may be constructed, invented etc. A system where large banks and networks develop exclusive advantages to own capital in a society is just one bad method amidst zillions of potential systems that people might invent or field as a fundamental template for free market transactions, use of capital etc.
Pure or impure capitalism is thus something of a wrong idea about mankind’s relation to capital. The ownership of capital was a great debate between socialism and people of the free societies that thought of themselves as capitalists. Neither side was too bright regarding political and economic philosophy.
A good example of the destruction of ‘pure capitalism’- capitalism without government intervention- was the government interventions in 2008–2009 to bail out banks and the most rich. Even large automakers were propped up by President Obama instead of being allowed to fail through bankruptcy and liquidation as would occur in ‘pure’ capitalism.
Keeping fossil fuel automakers alive undoubtedly hurt Tesla’s opportunity to become the dominant American automaker with a nation buying Teslas as if they were Model T Fords in the electric field. One day a national electric field may allow motorless ‘cars’ to shuttle about on superconducting lines.
Pure capitalism does not exist once government intervenes to ossify a system of protectionism for the most rich and advantaged players. Then democracy and free markets are ossified and made to serve the most rich without any semblance of an egalitarian economic allocation of resources remaining in existence.
No comments:
Post a Comment