trigs;368408 wroteCapitalism: An Invisible Prison (tentative title ;))
Part 1: The Curse of Privatization
Capitalism is “an economic system in which trade, industry and the means of production are controlled by private owners with the goal of making profit in a market economy. Central characteristics include capital accumulation, competitive markets, and wage labor” (wiki definition because I couldn’t phrase it better). We will analyze these characteristics (and some others) in more detail and consider whether they are actually a benefit to humanity or not.
First aspect to consider is privatization. As we can see in the definition above, this is a necessary element of capitalism. The concept of privatization in itself is not a bad thing as long as everyone has an equal chance in the purchasing and owning. As individuals, if we don’t have this equal chance, then right off the bat capitalism is favouring those who have better resources (see money). So yes, anyone can purchase products, items, space, etc. in the open market if and only if they have the means to do so (and those who have more means aren’t willing to outbid them). We can already see how just from this basic point, those with the means are already well ahead of the game versus those who start out with much less.
Now add to this the fact that corporations have been given the same rights as the individual (I think it’s referred to as corporate personhood or something like that, and it’s written into law ffs! i forget the name of the court case which set the precedent). Suddenly, we’ve set up a system that a corporation (see monopoly) can own as much as they want and can exist as long as they want (originally, the idea of a corporation was set for a limited time only and then dissolved after their business transaction was done). Therefore, in the private, global market the rich, corporations have a huge advantage over everyone else. We will come back to this concept later on and show that they in fact have even a bigger advantage due to the nature of capitalism.
Coming Soon: Part 2: Money, Money, Money - Motivation By Greed
Capitalism is an economic system where things (property, for example) are owned by people or an individual, not by a government or communities, and where people have to barter or work for money, so they can buy things they need or want, such as food. (stolen from the Simple Wikipedia, because I wanted something different from what you have).
I will start out by responding to your points, and then add more later if clarification is necessary. I would add that I'm fairly busy today but later tonight I can get more done.
Privatization is not a necessary element, private ownership is. Using "privatization" makes it seem as though the natural owned state of a thing(s) is collective. It is not. Returning something to private hands - what I would call privatization, as in utilities or airlines maybe - first requires that that thing be taken from - or given by - the private owner.
Why does everyone need an equal chance to purchase and own? Do you mean this for
anything? As in every person needs to have an "equal chance" to buy a sandwich, or a house, or an ounce of gold, or a McDonald's franchise? Without said equal chance, there is something wrong?
Further, your point here seems to suggest that it is immoral for one person to have more than another person. ("We can already see how just from this basic point, those with the means are already well ahead of the game versus those who start out with much less.") This is most certainly not the case, and if your entire argument is going to rest on this as a foundation, perhaps we need to stop progressing the conversation and look at why wealth accumulation is not immoral.
The idea of a corporation as a legal entity is not established by capitalism, but by the State. I'm not going to tell you that
corporatism is a good idea. But to the extent that a group of persons with a similar goal can hold joint ownership in a company, then what could be wrong with that? If the corporation cannot has no
more power than an individual, again, what is the problem? There should be no difference between what is permitted of John Deere corporation (assets $55 Billion, shared among the private owners of the stock) and Warren Buffet (individual, assets $58 Billion). Again though, if you want to discuss the legitimacy of the State, that is a different discussion than that of whether capitalism is moral (most moral!) or not.
