Are You Really Free Under Capitalism?

Author: ebuc ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 26
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,200
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc

    Simple answer is no.
  • Intelligence_06
    Intelligence_06 avatar
    Debates: 49
    Forum posts: 1,740
    4
    7
    11
    Intelligence_06 avatar
    Intelligence_06
    Well, the peak capitalism is just capitalism, except it can go 2 ways in the long term: If the government intervenes too much, it becomes authoritarianism, basically what China is right now. If the government intervenes too little, then it is anarcho-capitalism, which will furtherly turn to chaos. Since the government cannot intervene just the right amount at all times and at all places, capitalism is never perfect. So yeah, either you are not free, or you are in chaos.

    However, it is still easier to regulate compared to communism. 
  • MisterChris
    MisterChris avatar
    Debates: 40
    Forum posts: 1,897
    5
    9
    11
    MisterChris avatar
    MisterChris
    a hell of a lot more free than the alternatives
  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,705
    4
    7
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    how I imagine the video defines capitalism is corporatism thus I will be dismissing it
  • Lemming
    Lemming avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 372
    1
    2
    3
    Lemming avatar
    Lemming
    I didn't watch the video, but to me the question feels like,
    Are You Really Free Under Gravity?
  • Intelligence_06
    Intelligence_06 avatar
    Debates: 49
    Forum posts: 1,740
    4
    7
    11
    Intelligence_06 avatar
    Intelligence_06
    So yeah, either you are not free, or you are in chaos.
    I would like to point out something: This quote only works for already-formed economies. If a new government is with very good policies, then this doesn't apply for the start, but until not long.

  • armoredcat
    armoredcat avatar
    Debates: 7
    Forum posts: 388
    1
    4
    11
    armoredcat avatar
    armoredcat
    --> @Intelligence_06
    I don't see how what you're saying here follows. Lassiez-faire economies don't lead to ancapistan. In fact, despite there being plenty of free market economies in past and present, there's never been an ancapistan. Government intervention in the economy does not necessitate government intervention in the political systems either. Socialism doesn't neccesarily lead to authoritarianism. 
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 3,375
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @ebuc
    What is "free"?
  • Dynasty
    Dynasty avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 200
    0
    1
    7
    Dynasty avatar
    Dynasty
    --> @ebuc
    Better than communism.
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,200
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    --> @zedvictor4
    What is "free"?

    There exists only degrees-of-freedom, not true freedom.  

    Two points have one line-of-relationship { connected-ness }.= ergo restrictedness.

    Three points have three lines of relationship { connected-ness } ergo restrictedness.

    Four points we have six lines-of-relationship { connected-ness } ergo a quantum {? } leap from 3 to 6, with the addition of only one point.


    The only true freedom is that of the whole Universe being free from any lines-of-relationship, outside of itself.


  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,200
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc

    Five mega-corporations control most of the media. 


    ......2018...."  While much of the commentary has focused on the message's right-leaning content, I'd much prefer to discuss something far more insidious: the fact that it happened at all. Regardless of where you stand, the merest existence of politically-motivated must-runs is troubling. Local news stations – and the news in general – bases its reputation for trustworthiness on a commitment to truth and thereby neutrality, a neutrality that has been a guiding principle of American journalism for generations, and which today's divided political environment has been sending to the dogs.

    ....But while the bias of networks like Fox News or MSNBC is well-known, local stations are much less likely to be considered left or right. Which makes must-runs themselves incredibly dangerous, because they're coming out of the mouths of news anchors viewers know and trust, those they could very well run into at the supermarket or PTA meetings.

    ...The consolidation of international media has been on the public consciousness for some time, but the consolidation at the local level has been something of a sleeper story. If Sinclair is allowed to complete its proposed merger with Tribune Media we would find ourselves in a situation where 70 percent of American households receive their local news from a Sinclair-run news station, a company which is actively meddling in local news coverage to give it a rightward tilt.'... LINK


  • skittlez09
    skittlez09 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,014
    3
    3
    9
    skittlez09 avatar
    skittlez09
    So yeah, either you are not free, or you are in chaos.
    chaos is the natural order 

    anarchism is the ONLY political ideology that guarantees the freedom of the people 

    Capitalism - ruled by the wealthy 

    Communism - ruled by the government 

    Anarchism - rules by the people 
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 3,375
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @skittlez09
    Capitalism is hierarchical.

    Communism is hierarchical.

    Anarchy is hierarchical.

    You're part of a system whether you like it or not.

    How you fit into a system is entirely up to you and your capabilities.
  • MarkWebberFan
    MarkWebberFan avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 45
    0
    1
    6
    MarkWebberFan avatar
    MarkWebberFan
    I'm pretty sure humans labor with regularity. However, I think ideological systems (i.e. communism, capitalism, anarchy) do influence humans to a certain degree. I assume the point of living in a capitalist society is to consume and produce wealth as much as possible. I'm fine with that so long as literature is abundant. Media bias is a concern and I prefer to have media that is competently varied so I can consume wealth without partisan influence. But I suppose if it's biased (preventing me from being free), I'll settle for media bias rather than book burnings, if that makes sense.
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 3,375
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @MarkWebberFan
    Media is as biased as you allow it to be and therein lies the issue.

    If you are a certain age then you will more than likely be addicted to media technology, the ultimate goal of which is uncertain, but current goals have been achieved. I would suggest  that a lot of people are slightly less free than people used to be. 

    And if capitalist tyranny means freedom from human tyranny, then I think that I prefer it that way....Fortunately or not I haven't been able to make comparisons.

    As for technological tyranny....Well I think  we have just got to run with it or get left behind....Though I think that we will eventually be out paced.
  • MarkWebberFan
    MarkWebberFan avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 45
    0
    1
    6
    MarkWebberFan avatar
    MarkWebberFan
    --> @zedvictor4
    If you are a certain age then you will more than likely be addicted to media technology, the ultimate goal of which is uncertain, but current goals have been achieved. I would suggest  that a lot of people are slightly less free than people used to be.
    I think I disagree with your opinion that "a lot of people are slightly less free than people used to be." Now I'm not sure where your opinion comes from, but I think social media (i.e. tiktok) is a useful distraction for the public. In the past, there used to be book burnings. Right now, in my town, I could go to an old, decrepit book store and  find multiple copies of John Rawls' political essays. These essays are "forbidden" and possessing them could incur severe punishments. Fortunately, authoritarian third world governments and their censorship branches (i.e. China's mass surveillance, Iran's religious police) are too preoccupied with contemporary social media to the point that they don't bother to check on these things let alone schedule book burnings. I'm "free" in the sense that I need not worry about possessing banned literature.



    And if capitalist tyranny means freedom from human tyranny, then I think that I prefer it that way....Fortunately or not I haven't been able to make comparisons.

    Well, I'd rather enslave myself to wealth than worry about human inadequacy. When I talk about wealth, I am talking about extreme ranges (i.e. poverty). I'd rather live in poverty. I would not want to live under Duterte or Aung San Suu Kyi.

    As for technological tyranny....Well I think  we have just got to run with it or get left behind....Though I think that we will eventually be out paced.

  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 3,375
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @MarkWebberFan
    Being content to live in isolation without money, in a temperate environment, would be freedom from capitalist oppression, but immediate subjection to the oppression of survival.

    In terms of freedom it's a no win situation.

    Contentment within a capitalist society is perhaps as good as it get's.....Which doesn't necessarily mean striving to acquire wealth....Just an easily affordable day to day routine with no greater expectations....After all a kitchen is a kitchen, so why would you need a newer one.

    Sorry, but when I think about materialism, I always think of fitted kitchens for some reason.
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 1,099
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @ebuc
    The author of the video has a misconception about Capitalism. First, no country--at least the Industrial countries--are Capitalistic; they're either communist or quasi-communist countries. Second, positive freedom is incoherent. There are freedoms (negative) and entitlements (positive.) Capitalism facilitates freedom and contractual entitlements, not the "feeling" of entitlement (e.g. "freedom to a 'fair' share of the economy," and "the freedom to health care.") Each government regulates the prices and supply orders of these allegedly private businesses, which for the most part are just crony corporations funded with public subsidies. Capitalism can only be experienced in a society without a centralized government, so the youtuber's premise is either incorrect or incomplete.
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 1,099
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Intelligence_06
    If the government intervenes too little, then it is anarcho-capitalism, which will furtherly turn to chaos.
    No. Anarcho-capitalism is not the precursor to chaos. It simply rejects (centralized) governments as ruling mechanisms.
  • ebuc
    ebuc avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,200
    3
    2
    4
    ebuc avatar
    ebuc
    Capitalism can only be experienced in a society without a centralized government, so the youtuber's premise is either incorrect or incomplete.
    Ahtias appears to have blocked me ergo Athias is into one way street society, ergo I'm going around the block { cube } to speak to them.

    I think one way streets are a good idea, even tho they hinder communication.
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 1,099
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @ebuc
    I blocked you several months ago. And there's nothing that prevents you from communicating with me; the only difference is that I'm not notified of your responses. If you wish to be unblocked, then the melodrama can be spared. You are now unblocked. Don't blow it.
  • MarkWebberFan
    MarkWebberFan avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 45
    0
    1
    6
    MarkWebberFan avatar
    MarkWebberFan
    --> @zedvictor4
    ...immediate subjection to the oppression of survival.
    Well I see that now. I suppose those unfortunate enough to live under bridges are subjected to such conditions but I don't think your idea applies to me personally.

    In terms of freedom it's a no win situation.

    Contentment within a capitalist society is perhaps as good as it get's.....Which doesn't necessarily mean striving to acquire wealth....Just an easily affordable day to day routine with no greater expectations....After all a kitchen is a kitchen, so why would you need a newer one.

    Sorry, but when I think about materialism, I always think of fitted kitchens for some reason

87 days later

  • Jasmine
    Jasmine avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 126
    0
    3
    6
    Jasmine avatar
    Jasmine
    I guess not, but communism and socialism would be less free. If there's a economic system that's more free, can you let me know? Now I'm curious. 
  • sadolite
    sadolite avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 590
    2
    2
    4
    sadolite avatar
    sadolite
    No one is totally free under any economic system, but if I had to choose an economic system, capitalism wins hands down. No other economic system creates wealth.  All but capitalism are based on the equal distribution of poverty while capitalism is about the unequal distribution of wealth created.  Capitalism is the only economic system where the common man can become wealthy beyond their dreams without having to suck shit out of some politician or govt officials ass first.

  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 3,375
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @Jasmine @sadolite
    I would suggest that wealth and freedom do not necessarily go hand in hand.  Wealth has to be sustained and protected.


    I would further reiterate my suggestion that affordable contentment, free from social oppression is perhaps the preferable option....And is perhaps more achievable in a capitalist system.

    Though achieving contentment is sometimes just as much inner struggle against expectation, as it is a physical struggle to acquire money.