Hey, I get that we will most likely eventually have to agree to disagree. I didn't ever expect to turn you into an anarcho-capitalist over the course of two weeks.
trigs;369017 wrote
autonomy is the ability for someone to act freely. when someone is used for a means to an end (as opposed to an end in themselves), you are violating one's autonomy. kant had a very complicated argument about why limiting one's freedom is morally wrong, but i'm assuming you don't want to hear all that. let's just say that using people for your own goals is immoral (not evil - there's a big difference!), and capitalism uses everything and everyone for their own goals (of profit). hence, kant would say they are acting immoral.
it's fine if you don't understand the argument or you disagree. however, it's clearly immoral according to his theory, that's all i'm saying here to be honest.
Ok, lets leave aside the idea of which person is using who when it comes to employment. And I already stated my opinion that if you're free to quit you maintain your autonomy.
I want to look at the statement that I've bolded, because it's important. It's important because I absolutely agree with it. Limiting the freedom of another person (when they are not themselves violating someone's rights) is
indeed immoral.
And it's precisely why capitalism is not immoral while all other systems are! Other systems require - require! - much more violation of freedom than capitalism. Typically they require violence or threat of violence. If you want evidence of this, please supply me a list of which economic systems you want me to compare freedom-wise with capitalism.
Autonomy is protected by capitalism and destroyed by all others!
I agree very much that this discussion has been great. We over-reached perhaps, in what we attempted to do here. Really, we could spend 10x as much time discussing
just the morality of profit, or the idea of autonomy!