- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Look at your premises!

Posted by: David ( USA ) on October 20, 1999 at 13:54:54:

In Reply to: 'Brother's Keeper'?---I think not! posted by Stoller on October 20, 1999 at 01:03:23:

: Those who oppose the above aims are either woefully ignorant about socialism's aims---or the capitalist exploiters (and spokespersons) who benefit from such ignorance.

: Workers of the World Unite!

Look at your premises! When you say "...people doing some of each of the work necessary to sustain the people while so everyone can develop as a human being to the utmost of his and her capacity," you are, in essence saying that everyone has the obligation to contribute their labor to ease the labor of others so that those people can "develop as a human being..." I presume that those people who contributed their labor will in turn expect other people to contribute their labor so that they can in turn "develop as a human being..." So, when you break it all down, the premise of that statement is for one, that mans life is not means to his own end up in fact a means to the ends of others, whose lives are in turn a means to the ends of other people. In essence: man is his brother's keeper (in the hopes that his brothers will become his keepers).
Not only do you put the "collective" (group, society, etc..[it's all the same to me]) above the individual, you also stamp out the individual's freedom of choice and natural rights. If a man wants to, he can buy 50 eggs and then not eat them. It may be wasteful, some dying kid in somalia might have been able to eat them, but the man used his own money to purchase goods. Those goods become rightfully his and he can dispose of them however he damn well chooses.
If you don't like the fact that people do not consume what they purchase, then tough. You have no recourse against them. They are sovereign individuals, and so long as they do not infringe on the rights of others, regardless of whether you morally sanction them or not, they are free to act. There is only one alternative to free men, that is enslaved men. As Jefferson is attributed with saying, "I would rather suffer the inconveniences associated with too much liberty, then the inconveniences from lack of liberty."

As I have stated before, the worker is not compelled to sell his labor for anything less than what he thinks it is worth.s

Of course, I can see the rebuttal right now. With something about how the capitalist overlords are wage enslaving the working man etc...

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup