Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Why don't you incorporate the rest of what I said regarding the issue into your chastisement? Capitalism is a general condition, Free-Markets are not. They are not the same thing. If they were, why the redundancy of language? Why do we have a term 'free market' and a term 'capitalism'? I mean, historic usage and all.
I stand by the statement, Stalin was a capitalist. He privately owned a nation, and treated its people like capital that he traded for industrial capacity.,
Last edited by bv3; 04-10-2019 at 01:39 PM.
I zeroed in on a line that revealed the weakness of your point of view rather than making a TLDR post to end up saying the same thing I could say that succinctly.
I'm not saying that the terms "free markets" and "capitalism" are synonyms, so that's a straw man I see no need to bother with.
But those two things not being synonymous isn't a reason to cook up some new definition for "capitalism" that bears no resemblance to what the word really means.
Yes, consulting any decent dictionary is exactly the way to go about this. There is not just one definition of the word, just like there isn't just one definition of practically any word. But there is still a limited range of meanings of the way the word is normally used.
No, Stalin did not own the Russian nation as a private individual. His control of the economy was a function of his position within the state.
So he didn't own the nation, he just controlled it entirely. Ownership is what exactly?
"an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."
By function of his position in the State, did Stalin cease to be a private individual?
Last edited by bv3; 04-10-2019 at 02:00 PM.
Capitalism.. ?? ...
I think a lot of people are confused about what it is and what it ain't.
Liberty is lost through complacency and a subservient mindset. When we accept or even welcome automobile checkpoints, random searches, mandatory identification cards, and paramilitary police in our streets, we have lost a vital part of our American heritage. America was born of protest, revolution, and mistrust of government. Subservient societies neither maintain nor deserve freedom for long.
Ron Paul 2004
Registered Ron Paul supporter # 2202
It's all about Freedom
Oh. So Stalin wasn't a human? Was he sometimes a private individual and sometimes a state functionary--depending on his state of mind or location? Maybe a magic line outside the Kremlin that, when he crossed it, transformed him into a state functionary? I'd not argue that Stalin didn't use the State to enforce his will, but that his will was his own private will.
What human is anything other than a private individual, first?
I am not saying capitalism is bad, that would be like saying oxygen is bad. Its necessary, and no matter what name you give something, marxism, national socialism, monarchy, feudalism, whatever--it includes capitalism. But you missed that cause TLDR, or something.
Last edited by bv3; 04-10-2019 at 02:20 PM.
One acting as a functionary of the state.
I'm not going to keep going back and forth on this. The whole point of the qualification "private" in the definition of "capitalism" is over against "the state."
What you're doing now is trying to cook up new ways of using the words "private" and "state" that have nothing to do with their actual definitions, so that you can prop up the way you wanted to use the word "capitalism" in a way that bore no resemblance to its actual definition.
It's like Humpty Dumpty's philosophy of language in Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass.
You can go ahead and do that. But you'll only be talking to yourself. In order to communicate with others, you have to agree to use words within the parameters of their mutually agreed upon meanings as expressed through their historic usage in the language, as described in the definitions given in dictionaries.
Last edited by bv3; 04-10-2019 at 02:34 PM.
If something acts other than as a private individual, can that thing be a human? I can't imagine one that does. That a private individual insinuates himself into the State apparatus does not mean he is no longer a private individual. He may be a functionary, and his actions may be in line with that function, but he remains a private individual.
Last edited by bv3; 04-10-2019 at 02:51 PM.
I agree with you wrt communication. I just do not believe that I'm cooking up anything, its a bit insulting that you belabor that--but thats okay. Perhaps you are missing my point: A human being doesn't cease being exactly what it is--an individual--when it joins/takes over a club, group, society, government, whatever.
but you do say that that a human (Stalin, in this case) ceases to be a private individual when it enters the state apparatus, and I understand why you say that, I am saying that is a misapprehension. You are saying that the word private traditionally denotes a person NOT in the service of the state, and that said denotation is definitive of the word so I must be inventing a new word entirely, which I am not. And so far as the permanence of language, when taken to an extreme: oooga booga, *grunt*.
Anyways, well derailed. Free markets and capitalism are not the same thing, and Stalin remains a capitalist. Just like Marx was, and King Louis XIV, Frederick the Great, Ivan the Terrible, the first chief of the first village--the difference being that in free-market capitalism EVERYONE (ostensibly) has equal access to the market. Free markets are to capitalism what isonomy is to the law. I doubt you and I will make any further progress, or have made any.
Last edited by bv3; 04-10-2019 at 03:50 PM.
Actually, I am the one who supports free market, free enterprise to describe our system, the primary characteristics of which are people being left free to pursue their own economic interests, without government preferences, and with the least government intrusion, and left free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.
By contrast, capitalism's distinguishing feature is focused on the investment of capital to achieve an anticipated profit and/or goal.
cap·i·tal:… wealth in the form of money or other assets owned by a person or organization or available or contributed for a particular purpose such as starting a company or investing.ism:
… a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence, etc.
A free market, free enterprise system includes the use of capital by people in pursuing their individual economic interests, but the important distinguishing feature is with the least government intrusion, no special preferences, and left free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.
I am very curious as to why so many refuse to refer to our system as a free market, free enterprise system and prefer using "capitalism", a word never used to describe our system by our founders during the framing and ratification of our Constitution. Do they object to word "free" ?
Did you know that Karl Marx popularized the word "capitalist" and "capitalist mode of production" to attack the free market system, and they appear more than 2600 times in the trilogy "Das Kapital"?
In any event, I agree with Thomas Jefferson’s First Annual Message to Congress and his description using the word "free": ”Agriculture, manufactures, commerce, and navigation, the four pillars of our prosperity, are the most thriving when left most free to individual enterprise.”
JWK
The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to spread the evil tentacles of federal capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.
If you really do support this, then you cannot oppose capitalism.
Also, if you want a definition for the word "capitalism" you won't find it by combining the definitions of "capital" and "-ism." That is committing the root fallacy. You need to look up the definition of the word "capitalism" itself.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/capitalismCapitalism-
noun
1 an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.
That said, even using your own definition of "capitalism," it's still the case that you can't both oppose that and support free markets at the same time.
The word "capitalism" has been thwarted & stolen by the elitists & is now thought to be what we call "crony capitalism".
True capitalism IS free markets & operates thus:
-You make a product, people like it, you make more, hire more people, the costs go down, and you're on to more & better products.
-I make a product, it's low quality, people ignore it, time to make a better product.
THIS is true capitalism.
No government interference- period. The customer makes the decision.
There is no spoon.
Lets be perfectly clear here. What we are watching is an Exchange of Definitions.
We do NOT have a Free Market by ANY means what so ever. They are flat out practicing Fascism and telling everyone it is Capitalism so that people learn to hate the old ways, then those same morons that fall for the bait and switch tactic flock in droves to anything BUT Capitalism. Those at the top have NO intention of changing ANYTHING in actuality, but quickly slap new labels on old garbage to get people to buy the "New and Improved" $#@! Burger but still it is the exact same $#@! Burger as it was before. In fact, its probably WORSE than what you had before. Those at the top do NOT want Real Capitalism by ANY means because competition is a threat to their business model. Thus, to absolutely destroy Capitalism, they take peoples hatred towards the problems the current system has (again, NOT Capitalism) and easily redirect that hatred towards Capitalism by telling people what they have is Capitalism. It isnt. Its a $#@!ing lie. More fake news / disinformation.
The purpose of Exchanging Definitions is that it causes Confusion. Once Confusion has taken place in the mind of the victim, they become so desperate for an answer that they will accept ANY answer given to them as long as it sounds at least barely plausible. Confusion gives even more control to the Confusers. To which they will immediately follow their new definition with an order backed by LAW to go purchase your required daily ration of whatever $#@! you are on their list for.
1776 > 1984
The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.
The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide
Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled
I never indicated I oppose capitalism. Stop with your innuendos. I simply emphasized the prominent feature[s] between the two, and indicated our system is best described as free market, free enterprise, "free" being the operative word, a word you seem to have a problem with.
JWK
The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to spread the evil tentacles of federal capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.
Last edited by johnwk; 04-11-2019 at 07:30 AM.
So when you said the following, you didn't mean it as a criticism of capitalism?
I don't have a problem with it. I positively promote it. That's why I embrace capitalism, as all who who promote the free market do.Capitalism gave us Obama’s green energy money laundering operation, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Enron, our student loan crisis, and many other taxpayer financed disasters. Do you not learn from history?
see: The Sad Decline Of The Word "Capitalism"
If “capitalism” is viewed as a dirty word, should think tanks “clean it up” or abandon it? Like other Americans who were not born in the United States, I still mourn the loss of the word “liberal.” In most of the world the word means nearly the opposite of what it means here. I doubt that the word capitalism will be “stolen” but should we mind if it gets lost?
As to the meaning of "capitalism", why not apply fundamental rules to get at its meaning? Breaking the phrase down we find:
cap·i·tal:… wealth in the form of money or other assets owned by a person or organization or available or contributed for a particular purpose such as starting a company or investing.ism:
… a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence, etc.
capitalism's distinguishing feature is focused on the investment of capital to achieve an anticipated profit and/or goal.
JWK
The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and theSixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to spreadthe evil tentacles of federal capitalism into almost every corner of our oncefree market, free enterprise system
Connect With Us