Re: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise

From: Arlo Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Thu Jul 08 2004 - 20:16:35 BST

  • Next message: Chuck Roghair: "RE: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise"

    Platt wrote:

    >Seems peculiar to me that many who condemn the immorality of the free
    >enterprise system

    When did this happen? Did I miss something? Who said free markets are immoral?

    > for its focus on materialism get all bent out of shape
    >by the fact that everyone doesn't share equally in material things.

    Again, who said this? I certainly am not arguing that all things (material
    or otherwise) must be equally shared, only that the sharing is more
    equitable, and regards labor as people and not as objects. As I've said to
    Dan, I have no problem with wages being matched to labor activities.
    Certainly someone who is a master welder should earn a greater wage for
    her/his labor as someone working a cash register at McDonald's. My argument
    is against the purposeful fostering and maintenance of poverty in areas so
    that capitalists have access to "practically" slave labor, and how this is
    a necessary component of modern capitalism.

    I have no problem, nor find in it any moral dilemma, for some to have more
    than others. In a fair system, people would have access to the means to
    determine their own wages (through schooling and effort in the
    marketplace). But it is not a fair system, despite the corporate-driven
    propaganda, and the current system thus favors exploitation in order to
    improve profit margins for a very few.

    You seem to have the belief that nothing can exist except modern capitalism
    and eastern-bloc socialism, and since I am critical of the alienating
    aspects of modern capitalism, I must then certainly be in favor of an
    eastern-bloc regime. I just do not understand this, but will assume that's
    they way you have your world divided.

    > Does
    >anyone see a pesky contradiction here?

    I don't. Only when the argument is twisted back to "if you criticize
    capitalism you must be a socialist/communist/whatever", which is what you
    are doing.

    >Such inconsistency is neatly summed up by the phrase, "limousine
    >liberals," an apt description if there ever was one for the democrat
    >candidates now running for president and vice president of the U.S. :-)

    I prefer my Harley to a limousine, but I see here this neatly dichtomized
    view of things you espouse in the capitalism/socialism argument.

    >Best,
    >Platt

    Arlo

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 08 2004 - 20:48:08 BST