This above is a video on youtejjittube that has over 500,000 views. Some people say there that leftists are not replying to the man’s actually points. Ok, here goes - direct replies:
Myth 1 - ‘being pro capitalism is the same as being pro business…nothing could be further from the truth”
I could give this guy the benefit of the doubt and think he just worded that poorly, because it seems an very odd thing to say nothing could be further from the truth. If so then the truth is that pro-capitalists are ANTI-business? If we take business to mean, at its widest, commercial activity, then how are pro-capitalists against commercial activity? They are not. So, that very much is the truth. Or another definition: “In a business, people work to make and sell products or services to earn a profit.” How are pro-capitalists not for that? They are for that, therefore they are pro-business. Very odd to state “nothing could be further from the truth” about this.
“Point of capitalism is that businesses have to compete vigorously against each other.” Firstly, isn’t the fundamental point of capitalism to make profit? Or we might say, the real aim underneath that, is to create wealth so can have a decent life. But it considers that individuals and companies making profit in a free market is the best way to do that. The point is certainly NOT to have ’businesses compete vigorously against each other’. That is, more correctly stated, one of the processes commonly associated with the aim of making profit. On the other hand, the increasing concentration of power in the hands of a few huge companies is also one of the processes commonly associated with the aim of making profit.
“ultimately trying to help consumers.” - again, is that the aim of capitalism? He just said the aim was ‘businesses compete vigorously against each other’. As i said we can be generous and think he has not worded this well, as he seems a smart and thoughtful person. So, we might say that capitalism HOPES via chasing profits, and businesses competing against each other in the process, that this ends up helping consumers. That may be the case. It almost certainly is the case some of the time. But we have to ask ourselves:
1. Is that what actually happens most of the time, in real capitalism as we see it around us? Or can we see consumers being ripped off, and choices reduced, and being misled into buying things they dont need, etc.
2. If we see a very large amount of negative things that dont help consumers, or actively damage them… then what is the cause of that? Is it something fundamental in capitalism? Or is it because government or socialism or big corporations distort capitalism? He clearly thinks its the latter. I personally think its the former. Capitalism, by its very core nature, leads to things that damage us, our societies, our families.
Myth 2 - “what true capitalism does is rewards people who are productive.”
Two aspects there - what is ‘true’ capitalism? Can you define it in a way that defeats the ‘no true Scotsman’ fallacy? (and that is me speaking as a true, true Scotsman!). If you have some bad example of capitalism, like amazon treating its employees very badly,then as a pro-capitalist you may say ‘ah but that is not true capitalism’, and simply evade the criticism of your cherished belief. Same goes for supporters of communism or anything. So what are your fixed and clear definitions of capitalism that you will not shift when a negative examples comes along?
Look at what such big companies do: treating their employees badly, taking away their union rights, reducing medical and pensions perks, etc, giving them a maximum of 3 minutes for a toilet break, not allowing them to open a window on a hot day, etc…are those things the result of capitalism or of something else? It seems to me they are directly the result of capitalism. The reduction of COSTS is the basic reason for all such stuff, no? Isn’t the wish to reduce costs and increase profits a key aspect of capitalism?
Also, the reduction in the power that employees have to resist or change the system their boss wishes is a key element too. Isn’t it a cherished aspect of capitalism that it's YOUR company, you set it up, you made the investment, etc….so you can do what you like with it? Government and unions and socialism etc is not allowed to interfere. So, if those counter-acting aspects are pushed out of ‘true’ capitalism then doesn’t it mean you, as boss, will do exactly those things above….in order to get the most work out of your staff for the least cost? Or perhaps now someone will say ‘maximum profit for lowest costs’ is not a key aspect of capitalism. Oh boy!
As to the ‘rewards people who are productive’ part. This is partly true, i think. But it is hugely distorted. Did the directors of the recently bankrupt Thomas Cook travel agency get those huge payments because they worked hard and were productive and came up with good ideas? Or did they get them because their power within the company was far larger than the normal staff? Which was it? Clearly the latter.
Ok, so once again he and some folk may say ‘thats not true capitalism’. He said that businesses dont like true capitalism, and this he may say is an example: the way such business bosses reward themselves while laying off 10,000 of staff. That is a distortion of true capitalism is it? OR, is that unequal distribution of power a KEY element of capitalism? Something there at the very start, and which only become worse. Which is it?
“help those less fortunate because they are unlucky.” - now, this is so silly that i can no longer give the guy the benefit of the doubt. It is NOT lack of luck that has resulted in 10s of millions of people being in poverty in his country or without medical care or locked up in prison etc. It is structural aspects in the society, quite clearly. Perhaps he was stating it a a very crude way just to be clear to a wide amount of people.
Myth 3 - “capitalism is responsible for the recent financial recession - almost the opposite of what is true”
Here i think is where his point is the most sound. I think there is a large amount of misunderstanding of what caused that recent crash. Since we clearly do have a lot of government intervention in the US and UK etc, so then we would have to look at various causes. However, he admits that capitalism is partly to blame for it, its one factor. So capitalism does not come out of such stuff looking so good. It is by no means clear how a true capitalism would avoid such crashes and depressions. It seems to me they are also inherent in capitalism. After all we have had such crashes several times the last 150 years of capitalism. If your son crashed the car 7 times his explanation that it was always the fault of the other car starts to look doubtful. And his claim that ‘if only all the other drivers got out of my way i could be a really good driver, a TRUE driver!’ ...looks somewhat like a fantasy.
Then, the further point is: could what I call a BESS ( a better economic and social system) provide us with a more smooth ride? Could a non-capitalist BESS have less economic ups and downs? Could it do a better job of providing us with a happy life, without all the profit and power abuse craziness? Could it allow us to have work places were everyone gets a say in how things are organised? where everyone is treated with respect and gets a fair share of the benefit created by the work they do? Yes i think we are capable of making such a BESS, a better system - and that is, at root, why i dont support capitalism.
It’s not all bad, but its not good enough. We can do better.
Myth 1 - ‘being pro capitalism is the same as being pro business…nothing could be further from the truth”
I could give this guy the benefit of the doubt and think he just worded that poorly, because it seems an very odd thing to say nothing could be further from the truth. If so then the truth is that pro-capitalists are ANTI-business? If we take business to mean, at its widest, commercial activity, then how are pro-capitalists against commercial activity? They are not. So, that very much is the truth. Or another definition: “In a business, people work to make and sell products or services to earn a profit.” How are pro-capitalists not for that? They are for that, therefore they are pro-business. Very odd to state “nothing could be further from the truth” about this.
“Point of capitalism is that businesses have to compete vigorously against each other.” Firstly, isn’t the fundamental point of capitalism to make profit? Or we might say, the real aim underneath that, is to create wealth so can have a decent life. But it considers that individuals and companies making profit in a free market is the best way to do that. The point is certainly NOT to have ’businesses compete vigorously against each other’. That is, more correctly stated, one of the processes commonly associated with the aim of making profit. On the other hand, the increasing concentration of power in the hands of a few huge companies is also one of the processes commonly associated with the aim of making profit.
“ultimately trying to help consumers.” - again, is that the aim of capitalism? He just said the aim was ‘businesses compete vigorously against each other’. As i said we can be generous and think he has not worded this well, as he seems a smart and thoughtful person. So, we might say that capitalism HOPES via chasing profits, and businesses competing against each other in the process, that this ends up helping consumers. That may be the case. It almost certainly is the case some of the time. But we have to ask ourselves:
1. Is that what actually happens most of the time, in real capitalism as we see it around us? Or can we see consumers being ripped off, and choices reduced, and being misled into buying things they dont need, etc.
2. If we see a very large amount of negative things that dont help consumers, or actively damage them… then what is the cause of that? Is it something fundamental in capitalism? Or is it because government or socialism or big corporations distort capitalism? He clearly thinks its the latter. I personally think its the former. Capitalism, by its very core nature, leads to things that damage us, our societies, our families.
Myth 2 - “what true capitalism does is rewards people who are productive.”
Two aspects there - what is ‘true’ capitalism? Can you define it in a way that defeats the ‘no true Scotsman’ fallacy? (and that is me speaking as a true, true Scotsman!). If you have some bad example of capitalism, like amazon treating its employees very badly,then as a pro-capitalist you may say ‘ah but that is not true capitalism’, and simply evade the criticism of your cherished belief. Same goes for supporters of communism or anything. So what are your fixed and clear definitions of capitalism that you will not shift when a negative examples comes along?
Look at what such big companies do: treating their employees badly, taking away their union rights, reducing medical and pensions perks, etc, giving them a maximum of 3 minutes for a toilet break, not allowing them to open a window on a hot day, etc…are those things the result of capitalism or of something else? It seems to me they are directly the result of capitalism. The reduction of COSTS is the basic reason for all such stuff, no? Isn’t the wish to reduce costs and increase profits a key aspect of capitalism?
Also, the reduction in the power that employees have to resist or change the system their boss wishes is a key element too. Isn’t it a cherished aspect of capitalism that it's YOUR company, you set it up, you made the investment, etc….so you can do what you like with it? Government and unions and socialism etc is not allowed to interfere. So, if those counter-acting aspects are pushed out of ‘true’ capitalism then doesn’t it mean you, as boss, will do exactly those things above….in order to get the most work out of your staff for the least cost? Or perhaps now someone will say ‘maximum profit for lowest costs’ is not a key aspect of capitalism. Oh boy!
As to the ‘rewards people who are productive’ part. This is partly true, i think. But it is hugely distorted. Did the directors of the recently bankrupt Thomas Cook travel agency get those huge payments because they worked hard and were productive and came up with good ideas? Or did they get them because their power within the company was far larger than the normal staff? Which was it? Clearly the latter.
Ok, so once again he and some folk may say ‘thats not true capitalism’. He said that businesses dont like true capitalism, and this he may say is an example: the way such business bosses reward themselves while laying off 10,000 of staff. That is a distortion of true capitalism is it? OR, is that unequal distribution of power a KEY element of capitalism? Something there at the very start, and which only become worse. Which is it?
“help those less fortunate because they are unlucky.” - now, this is so silly that i can no longer give the guy the benefit of the doubt. It is NOT lack of luck that has resulted in 10s of millions of people being in poverty in his country or without medical care or locked up in prison etc. It is structural aspects in the society, quite clearly. Perhaps he was stating it a a very crude way just to be clear to a wide amount of people.
Myth 3 - “capitalism is responsible for the recent financial recession - almost the opposite of what is true”
Here i think is where his point is the most sound. I think there is a large amount of misunderstanding of what caused that recent crash. Since we clearly do have a lot of government intervention in the US and UK etc, so then we would have to look at various causes. However, he admits that capitalism is partly to blame for it, its one factor. So capitalism does not come out of such stuff looking so good. It is by no means clear how a true capitalism would avoid such crashes and depressions. It seems to me they are also inherent in capitalism. After all we have had such crashes several times the last 150 years of capitalism. If your son crashed the car 7 times his explanation that it was always the fault of the other car starts to look doubtful. And his claim that ‘if only all the other drivers got out of my way i could be a really good driver, a TRUE driver!’ ...looks somewhat like a fantasy.
Then, the further point is: could what I call a BESS ( a better economic and social system) provide us with a more smooth ride? Could a non-capitalist BESS have less economic ups and downs? Could it do a better job of providing us with a happy life, without all the profit and power abuse craziness? Could it allow us to have work places were everyone gets a say in how things are organised? where everyone is treated with respect and gets a fair share of the benefit created by the work they do? Yes i think we are capable of making such a BESS, a better system - and that is, at root, why i dont support capitalism.
It’s not all bad, but its not good enough. We can do better.