- Capitalism and Alternatives -

I would draw a distinction between property and possession though.

Posted by: LARK on April 14, 1999 at 16:52:47:

In Reply to: liberty without liberty posted by Gee on April 14, 1999 at 12:43:06:

: My support of private property is entirely connected to my belief that personal liberty can mean nothing if other people can decide what to do with the things you create and exchange. Im not yer average 'look at my new pick up, its so cool' consumerist, but I cant seperate liberty from property the way you appear to, without envisaging the disappearance of liberty.

Gee I believe we're that different, I mean if I had a new pick up it'd be mine and I wouldnt want just any hippy driving it off so that I could prove that I was oh so egalitarian and anti-propertarian.

I would draw a distinction between property and possession though. Say in land we cant all have land so the right of property in land for some deprives the rest of us of the liberty of the land owner. However abolishing property in land is very,very impractical and I've yet to hear a good argument on how to go about it (other than if someone has a good reason EG I'll grow potatos etc. if I have just enough room to do that, which I think you'll agree is a tad simplistic). So I'd advocate that it's current owners are bombarded with argument (we might not out vote them but we will out argue them, who said that?) while trying to control the way they use it, even if that involves using the state as a utility.

: Again, those 700 I mentioned are new entrants (I the last few decades) and they are joined annually by new companies. Competition has effectively pruned bad companies (look at a list of companies of the 50s, some are dead, some are tiny parts of a new company, some grew strong) whilst new companies just keep entering the market.

I think that is a generalisation but as side from that it doesnt matter how efficent the company is, I dont know that they are that efficient ever notice how a new Pentium Processor comes out every Christmas? It's not continual advance it's hanging back on advance until it'll turn a price, I dont care.

I cant get good left books from either the lefty shops, run on pure voluntary zeal, or the chainstores, run on your wonderous "rational self interest" (cant we just call it greed?).

What I do care about is authoritarian management and the like, I even hate good, pleasant management I'll never raise a glass with anyone who'll make me do their will, the ploiferation of shitty service sector industry that is developing in this post-industrial society (which you see as positive) just multiplies this problem. People get treated like shite, I know it happened in Russia and all the rest but I'm no fan of those regimes as you know.

Strain on ecological, finite, resources too.....

: I think that when a business involves itself in politics in order to use the politicians guns to force a situation it cannot agree by reason it is not a business move.

And I dont think Russia was socialist. I dont think Hitler, Stalin, Mao where socialists. As you accuse me of historical revisionism and making excuses I now do the same to you.

:However many govts (and local coucils!) deliberately put up some obstructive law in order to put the reigns on a businesses. An old example is Vanderbilt in America. He 'bribed' politians who would deliberately put up a bill which would stop an intented business move - it was a popular ploy back then, like a protection racket by politicians.

Yeah, Governments do this but let the Selfishness is Good/God genie out of the bottle and it'll play havoc, like this how do you prevent this? Not by leaving the market to it if that was the case it'd never have happened. Not by simply "Abolishing" the state because through his wealth this guy could hire secuirity etc. and become the state.

:Those particular corrupt legislators got their justice when they tried to rip him off in the stock market, by acting quick he ruined scores of them and they deserved it.

hold on your painting this corporate dude as a hero, he could have exposed these dudes he desearves a dishing of justice too but who's going to do it? The workers and unions? The consumers? you know that both these groups are non-existant organisaitonally.

:A more subtle version of this protection racket is now acted out in washington and no doubt every western capital city. Its vital to understand where the corruption lies in such cases.

Yeah, I know, it is shared between the state and the propertarians/capitalists/new wealth aristo's so any abolition of any factor in isolation isnt going to get the hoped for results.

: No its not that, it takes masses of energy and ability.

That's just a bit utopian, as a threat to their interests existing competitors will "deal with you" no matter how much energy etc. you apply, or money and influence you apply for that matter.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup