Capitalist democracy?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Facial, Oct 2, 2005.

?

Is free-market capitalist democracy possible?

  1. Yes.

    12 vote(s)
    54.5%
  2. No.

    10 vote(s)
    45.5%
  1. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,225
    This is a spin-off from my other thread about socioeconomic systems...

    I'm having the impression that socialist ideals are a better embodiment of democracy (rule of the people) than capitalism. So I ask: Is democracy possible to its full extent under socialism with capitalism?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. one_raven God is a Chinese Whisper Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,433
    Well, if you take a direct Democracy, in its most strict sense, then, sure, as long as more than half the people agree with Capitalist ideals.
    But then, the Captialism is subject to the whims of the people, and inherently unstable.

    If you take Democracy in the sense of its purpse and ideal - the "spirit" of Democracy - then no.


    The point, as I see it, of Democracy is to give the majority of the people a say in their government affairs and offer a measure of equality of people.
    The spirit of Democracy is to offer equal opportunity to all its citizens.
    Not necessarily equality, but equal opportunity.

    Capitalism, by its very nature and design, lets money rule.
    Those without money, therefore are not offered the same opportunities as those with money.

    In a Capitalist society power comes not from merit, but from money.
    Equal opportunity does not exist.
    Therefore, as I said in the other thread, the two ideals are internally inconsistent.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2005
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    in Democrazy for a poor man there is no such thing as equal opportunity.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. candy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,074
    True democracy in it's purest form is mob rule. I believe that most of us want some kind of social contract that has a framework of government that protects the individual's rights from the excesses of mob rule.
     
  8. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Power determines not only what can happen, but what will happen. Money is power. Laissez faire capitalism concentrates money, and hence power, in the hands of the few. The probability that these few act in a manner beneficial to the population at large is low.
    The solution to a properly implemented democracy is education. Educated persons will be more inclined to participate in democratic institutions, whether these be school boards, national votes, political activism, stockholder meetings, or whatever. In such a framework capitalism would be constrained in a positive manner. That, however, would not be what I take you to mean by free-market capitalism.
     
  9. mars13 give me liberty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,085
    damocracy WILL NEVER work without inforcing the rules of capitalism.

    no price gouging,monopolies,bribery,things like that will be the death of america.
     
  10. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    It all depends on who is running the show. No matter how good a system is there's always going to be corruption and greed to take everything they can away from those who need it the most.
     
  11. Joker? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    148
    “Shut up I told you I’m a fucking republican, no not the BLACK MARKET, THE WHITE HOUSE MARKET!

    Call me a fucking genius.
     
  12. malkavpunk Now with Child Protective Cap Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    41
    true democracy = anarchism. Plain and simple. it's impossible to give everyone an equal say in any capitalist economy.
     
  13. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    One Raven:

    One way where we might judge merit is by lawfully gotten gains, that is to say, wealth. Those who are wealthy are necessarily superior to the poor. Moreover, equality of opportunity exists quite well in capitalism, as it is rooted in the idea of trade. Should you be able to offer something in trade for something else that appeals to the people, one will gain wealth. If one does not, one shan't. All people have an equal chance to succede or fail based on their own merit.

    Anomalous:

    Not to sound Stoogesque, but if you're poor, get rich.

    Ophiolite:

    An educated person actually has little reason to serve in any democratic institution, as it is fundementally a system which serves the worse. All varieties of superior men are drowned beneath the mass of the inferior through the nonsense which is "one-man one vote".


    malkavpunk:

    Hobbes would disagree, calling such a state, "...nasty, brutish, and short."
     
  14. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    its not easy, even education requires money, If a poor man is above 16 years of age and there is nothing to eat, do U expect him to make it ? and higher studies require high expenses, please tell me if there is solution for this anywhere in world as an sucessful example ?
     
  15. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Naturally, I bow to your superior education.

    For those who do not understand irony be aware the PJs response is symptomatic of the predatory human, not the social/cultural human. You may derive your own conclusions from this fact.
     
  16. malkavpunk Now with Child Protective Cap Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    41
    Although i thoroughly respect Hobbes as a philosopher and generally great thinker, i think this is the schism in our belief structures
     
  17. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    Anomalous:

    Do as Ben Franklin did: Cut one's food bill in half by becoming a vegetarian.

    Ophiolite:

    In what way would you classify me as "predatory"?


    malkavpunk:

    So you deny that, left to their own devices, humanity is more likely to turn on itself in an orgy of violence?
     
  18. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    That's a fair question. In general predators are solitary animals who are self focused to a very high degreee. The only extent to which they will intereact with others is in the field of procreation and here the cooperation centres around protection and projection of the individuals DNA. (Male lions, for example, will kill cubs they encounter that are not theirs.)
    Human success has been largely built upon cooperation and the building of complex cultures wherein multiple kinds and levels of relationship exist in many (indeed probably all) aspects of life. [Obviously this building of culture would not have been possible without our intelligence.]
    Predatory humans are those who, as you clearly do from you posting, believe in an approach that is best summed up as the cliche 'survival of the fittest'. I favour one that is supportive of the apparently weak, because each person has strengths they can contribute to the whole. We are better as a team than we are as individuals.
    These are two different world views. I believe yours is fundamentally flawed and destructive, you may well feel the same about mine. I suspect we shall have to agree to differ.
    By the way, don't confuse co-operative, 'herd' behaviour as a weakness. I am reminded of the apocryphal sign on the cage in a zoo. "This Animal is Dangerous. When Attacked it Defends Itself."
     
  19. sniffy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,945
    I understand that the phrase 'survival of the fittest' is a rather unfortunate 'soundbite' which has done much disservice to the understanding of the evolutionary process. Evolution does not select 'the fittest' as in the most powerful but the best adapted for existing conditions. Therefore a 'gatherer' is as likely to survive as a 'hunter' if the prevailing conditions suit. Indeed it would be vey difficult for hunters to exist without legions of gatherers...
     
  20. Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog) Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,214
    Ophiolite:

    This is true, I am a Social Darwinist to some extent, although I make room for the weak when they serve the purposes of the strong. All packs of wolves need, first and foremost, the alpha male and female, but they also need the rest of the "Greek alphabet" of the pack. My problem with Democracy is that it does not reflect the heirarchy-centric system of nature, nor does it promote merit, but in fact, attacks the very foundation of it through making merit all but worthless.

    Potentially, although I'd love to debate the issue rationally with you.

    Herd behaviour is not necessarily a weakness, but obsessive herd behaviour leads to the sacrifice of the individuals, specifically for those incapable of supporting themselves.

    sniffy:

    This is true.
     
  21. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    This would probably require a separate thread, as this seems peripheral to the very specific intent of this one. I'll leave it to your alpha male qualities to start one if you wish.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Like any wolf in sheep's clothing I shall be skirting the edges of the forum waiting to pounce.
     
  22. sniffy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,945
    This notion that nature is a heirarchy is fatally flawed. What nature has provided so far is a complex and INTERCONNECTED system.

    A herd is no more or less weak than a pack of wolves given a particular set of circumstances. A pack of wolves can be successful in that it hunts, feeds and breeds thus ensuring the survival of the pack. A successful herd forages, eats and breeds thus ensuring the survival of the herd. A pack that eats the whole herd is heading for extinction -therin lies the lesson for homo sapiens and their over reliance on the exploitative system of capitalism. Man cannot live by bread alone!

    Also what is an alpha male and an alpha female without a pack? Just a male and a female...
     
  23. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Not strictly true. The alpha type is predisposed to to want the leadership position and to adopt certain stratetegies and ploys to attain it. Those are independent of their actual role.
     

Share This Page