"Okay... kinda bummed that's all you got out of this, but okay."
It's good stuff. I don't mean to be critical of your political hero, but rather analytical thereof. Don't take me the wrong way. I'm just trying to understand his thinking.
"This will be a fun exercise."
Indeed.
"I've got a challenge for you. Please define capitalism, democracy, and socialism."
Alright...
Democracy is a method of decision making whereby the majority wins. Socialism and Capitalism are economic strategies or systems within an economy.
The danger of a democracy is that the minority can be abused. The danger of a republic is faulty representation. The bill of rights was part of the founders' answer to this problem. Their thinking was that, whatever kind of government, there must be parameters to ensure protection of inalienable rights, something to give the people a voice.
Mr. Graeber understood this, but seems to attribute protection of rights as something specifically democratic in nature. There is a certain ambiguity in his articulation that leaves me wondering. ("And of course, most of us are here because we still don’t think we’re living under a democratic system in any meaningful sense of the term.")
As for economics...
Economics is laissez-faire by default. It must be a free market in order to function properly. Any attempt to control/regulate it does damage, causes imbalance.
Capitalism and Socialism function as money management strategies WITHIN said free market (wherever appropriate). For example; use the capitalist model to run your business and the socialist model to manage community welfare or infrastructure systems.
Government, and those who own it, forcefully regulate a mixed economy that gets branded as a capitalism and everyone thinks capitalism sucks. Capitalism is operating at a profit and reinvesting to expand. How can anyone be anti-capitalism? That's silly.
The Capitalism vs Socialism debate reminds me of the "Tastes great - Less filling" Bud Light commercials.
Oh cool, Graeber
NEVERMORE Y UN ADIOS FELICES GRACIAS
I suspect anti-capitalist pro-democracy David Graeber was a confused socialist tyrant.
Okay... kinda bummed that's all you got out of this, but okay.
I've got a challenge for you. Please define capitalism, democracy, and socialism.
This will be a fun exercise.
"Okay... kinda bummed that's all you got out of this, but okay."
It's good stuff. I don't mean to be critical of your political hero, but rather analytical thereof. Don't take me the wrong way. I'm just trying to understand his thinking.
"This will be a fun exercise."
Indeed.
"I've got a challenge for you. Please define capitalism, democracy, and socialism."
Alright...
Democracy is a method of decision making whereby the majority wins. Socialism and Capitalism are economic strategies or systems within an economy.
The danger of a democracy is that the minority can be abused. The danger of a republic is faulty representation. The bill of rights was part of the founders' answer to this problem. Their thinking was that, whatever kind of government, there must be parameters to ensure protection of inalienable rights, something to give the people a voice.
Mr. Graeber understood this, but seems to attribute protection of rights as something specifically democratic in nature. There is a certain ambiguity in his articulation that leaves me wondering. ("And of course, most of us are here because we still don’t think we’re living under a democratic system in any meaningful sense of the term.")
As for economics...
Economics is laissez-faire by default. It must be a free market in order to function properly. Any attempt to control/regulate it does damage, causes imbalance.
Capitalism and Socialism function as money management strategies WITHIN said free market (wherever appropriate). For example; use the capitalist model to run your business and the socialist model to manage community welfare or infrastructure systems.
Government, and those who own it, forcefully regulate a mixed economy that gets branded as a capitalism and everyone thinks capitalism sucks. Capitalism is operating at a profit and reinvesting to expand. How can anyone be anti-capitalism? That's silly.
The Capitalism vs Socialism debate reminds me of the "Tastes great - Less filling" Bud Light commercials.