Capitalism is Tyranny

Capitalism has its cycles. But it's not all about greed. There are always people with morals, fighting these people, in any system. Slavery is an example of what capitalism is capable of, and it serves as a lesson to all mankind. But slavery ended without dismantling capitalism. There is moral progress in capitalism. It's not always about profit. Profit could have been continued to be had by slavery in the 18th and 19th centuries when nations started banning it. There must have been a reason for the bans, because one can read many angry letters from corporations, etc. Many people didn't like the new rules on slavery, and it definitely impacted the rich's profits, in one country after another, like dominoes. How does capitalism breeds nothing but greed explain this? How does it explain the fact that we don't have children working in mines here anymore? In some circumstances, it may be very profitable to do this, but we don't anymore, despite the loss of profit potential. Again, not explained if capitalism only serves greed.

 

I disagree. Crapitalism is predicated on greed by default. It MAY serve poorer folks along the way to some degree, but it ALWAYS serves the best interests of the very wealthy. Morality takes a back seat to profit, ALWAYS. "The corporation" has the exclusive goal of making the MOST MONEY POSSIBLE. That's GREED, friend. Morality ISN'T profitable, and it ISN'T practiced in the corporate world, and it has no place in the corporate world. Yes, it's ALWAYS about profit, and it's ALWAYS about greed. No question about it, whatsoever.

 

????Sooooo then get a job with an individual proprietorship or partnership, if you have a problem with corporations. Frequently the large corporations have higher wages and better benefits though.

 

Corporations DO NOT have higher wages, they offer the LOWEST, but thanks for your suggestion. I already live outside the corporate world, as best I can though. I boycott the biggest of them whenever possible, It isn't always possible, but, I try.

 

Funny since the most capitalist civilization on the planet (the West) is also the most free.

Hm.....wonder why that is? >_>

 

Nah, its predicated on self interest. Some people are motivated by greed. Not all. And greed is just as likely to lead to failure as it is success within capitalism. Certainly not predicated upon it. And the option to acting in ones own self interest in socialism is to act according to what someone else determines is in your best interest. From each according to his abilities and to each according to his needs, determined by the collective instead of the individual.

 

Greed is the basic premise of all things corporate, and we thrive on the corporation, as a nation. Self interest, and greed are very closely related. Greed is rewarded in our economic system, and is considered "success", measured in total dollars. The individual is dying a painful death, overtaken by the corporation. What's likely to occur with greed, and the corporation, is complete economic failure on a very grand scale, IMO. The motivation of the individual is to simply survive these days, as that's all that's really possible for MOST working people, and even that is becoming impossible to do, without acquiring immense debt.

 

I doubt you're even willing to listen.

[video=youtube;alP0WiL2P0g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alP0WiL2P0g[/video]

no

of course it's only your opinion, because it isn't rooted in fact. Tell me, if greed is so destructive, what society has ever operated without greed?

 

Only when you compare it to what you can imagine. Compared to every other economic system that has existed in the real world, it is a resounding success.

 

I have no faith in the state and i will be very happy when civilians decide to make it obsolete but to do that you first have to achieve social and personal maturity. So far your behavior all this times state order was absent is crap , remember what happen in New Orleans?
Hell even people who are "above the law" behave bad , how about cops shouting civilians for nothing ? how about your president randomly droning civilians about the world? how about NSA spying on their ex girlfriends?
For as long as you fail to restrain yourself you will need the state to keep you from exterminating each other.

 

Apparently no such thing has ever existed or ever likely will exist while humans dominate he planet.

 

So explain the reasons for the bans on slavery starting just before 1800, that occurred in dozens of countries, 1 by 1. It was obviously NOT profitable for world leaders to make these decisions, as slavery at the time was making European monarchs rich, not just the corporations. And the corporations basically begged their leaders not to ban slavery. They did it anyway. Why, if capitalism is about greed?

 

Does anyone listen much to the pope anymore? Even devout catholics?

I realize it is a relatively new pope and each one is a little different but the Roman catholic church has lost a lot of credibility and respect in recent decades.

BTW capitalism did not start with slavery.

 

Good question but there is an answer somewhere. Firstly, britain likes to say they were the first to abolish it. The reason they deemed it illegal eventually, is because they lost CONTROL of the market and its profitability to other european powers, like france, so it was in britains economic interests to abolish it. Also another big factor is that the 'abolition' of slavery coincided with 'the scramble for afrika'. This was where the the europeans divided the continent up into colonial states, they needed the so-called afrikans in Afrika then, to work the resources. An example being the Congo 'free' State. A crazy name for such a brutal and exploitative regime.

Disagree? Then how do you explain the dramatic and sudden change of consciousness with the british ruling elite?

- - - Updated - - -

Thats why istated 'Modern Capitalism' started with slavery. Its not my opinion, many scholarly articles and books come to this conclusion.

 

I would say that capitalism, occurring in a free society, is nudged by morality. It is checked, despite the arguments that it leads only to tyranny. But it requires the people to have a voice.

 

What does that even mean? Everything should be GUIDED by morality, this is the problem. Its already been explained. Profit is the NUMBER 1 priority with capitalism. Everything else comes last.

 

Modern Capitalism did not start with slavery and no credible econimist believes it did. It is in fact merely your opinion that it did

 

Of course they would not admit it. Thats like asking the pope to admit the messiah was a so-called black man. Would completely discredit his whole industry.

 

There is nothing to admit because it is simply not true. Slavery and captalism are two different things and modern capitalism did not start with slavery.

As for the pope as an atheist I could care less.

There is no evidence that Jesus even existed although I can respect the views of many secular historians who believe that a man named Jesus led a religious movement which grew into what we now call christianity today. He may have even been crucified. But being miraculously raised from the dead etc? That part is myth.

Either way Jesus would not have been a black man he would have been semetic which is different.

And in fact the myth of Jesus would not have been based on race at all he could easily have been any color or race and his industry remains the same as does the industry of the Roman catholic church. In fact every culture has at least some christians who identify with Jesus and portray him similar to themselves.

Christianity including catholicism has no root or basis in a white ( or any specific colored ) Jesus

 

But the banning of slavery proves that profit is not the number 1 priority at all times in a capitalist system. Otherwise we either still have slaves and child labor OR we would have dismantled the capitalist system. But the continuation of the capitalist system simultaneously with the advancement of morals in our society proves that profit is not always the number 1 priority in a capitalist society.

 

Hitler had some measure of success before his demise, as well.

 

With that particular subject, morality actually won out over profit. Basically, the people quit taking it and most people had a conscience. Today, there is no conscience in the corporate world. Only profit, and how to get MORE of it, and they're smarter about it now. They use economic slavery instead, and it is much more effective. Easier to get a slave to work hard when he thinks he's helping himself, in addition to the slave masters. Keeps him showing up at work everyday "voluntarily". Morality had a place in those days. Today, it has none.

 

Morality won out, yes. Now let's fast forward to today. If corporations today are operating without morality, don't you think they have an interest in preventing morality from winning out, like it has before? Now let's switch focus to the governments of the nations in which these corporations are operating out of, namely the US. If the US government and corporations are really in bed, don't they have an interest in hiding the immorality of their actions? Because it is known that the people's conscience as a whole has the capability to end immoral practices.

So my question would be, why did the US govt and corporations not only allow an internet to develop, but allowed completely free speech on it, allowing me and you to debate the morality of their actions, like never before in the history of mankind? Something doesn't add up with the evil capitalist empire theory....

 

The internet probably developed by accident, and then they found they could make huge amounts of dollar from it so, on it went. There WILL come a day though, where the internet will cease to exist, or be "shut down" (accidentally of course), probably during the next false flag. This forum, for example, is highly selective in what they 'allow' to get posted. Check out the 9/11 section sometime, and monitor the posts there. Watch how they get deleted or "edited". Anyway, that's another story. Your question was "why'. My simple answer is that they didn't/couldn't anticipate the widespread use of it as has resulted. But, that's where the NSA comes in too. EVERYTHING is monitored these days, and they'll come up with a way to selectively eliminate information spreading on the internet, trust me. They're already working on it. Ever heard of internet 2? Google it. Paid access for 'those that c an afford' the speed, and slower, dysfunctional service for those that can't. They'll stay out of the bandwidth and be relegated to the slow lanes, for example.

 

I share your concerns with the internet. The internet, because of the fact that people across nations are debating on it like never before could occur, imo, is vitally important to the progress of mankind. I remain vigilant for any control of it. But I am also aware that there are those that recognize its power that will seek to blunt its impact. But those people, in my view, include more than just the US govt or corps. They include hackers and propagandists from around the world, with their own interests in disabling or blunting its effect. It's hard to tell if the US response to these people is security, or oppression. But if my ability to use the internet goes away, and I determine it is because of the actions of the US govt or corps, I will find a way to speak out against it. But that day has not come.