- Capitalism and Alternatives -

And then again . . .

Posted by: Joel Jacobson ( none, USA ) on March 24, 1999 at 11:40:25:

In Reply to: Nope, he's a Deleuzian. posted by Red Deathy on March 23, 1999 at 13:52:52:

: Erm, no, because teh Doctrine of Essence is an idea that something doesn't exist, but by its not existing, or trying to come into existence, the historical dialectic moves forwards, capitalism is an Essence, a movement, but it tehrefore doesn't exist. Nice try.

No. "Capitalism" doesn't exist at all, either as a particular pheonmenon or an essential things-in-themselves, which we can never know anyway. It is simply a label you have given, based upon your particular value judgements, to something you see wrong. If a free market economist, such as Milton Friedman, makes a reference to "capitalism" they simply are refering to a broad category of instances where there is an acceptance of discrete property, exchange currency (private or public), and a mixture of various factors. The term "capitalism" as you use it is from a propagandistic 1903 work entitled "Kapitalismus der [I forgot the rest]" and simply refers to an idealist construct of your particular mind and based upon your particular value judgements and opinions. Milton Friedman and I do not need the terms "capitalism" or "socialism" at all as they do not lend any relevance to how we order our lives, beliefs and actions. You, however, must have these terms as they represent specific ideals for you pertaining to some future, but one of which you can neither bring about or even give a semblance of events of how this might be brought about.

"Capitalism", for you, is a whipping boy when no reasonable courses of action present themselves. "Capitalism", for me, is merely a convenient reference (one without which I would still completely retain my ideas), one covering any combination of a multitude of factors. For instance, ancient trading centers in Messopotamia were capitalistic.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup