When one encounters an irony like this, one can only sit back and bask in it. Yes, you have gone to great lengths to treat me with respect, while comparing me to Duane Gish. What more could you ask for?
Oh, and in order to finish something, you first have to start.
This clearly will not do as a definition of capitalism. Your quasi-definition will not do, for the simple reason that it fits virtually every economic system that has ever existed. Perhaps you might take a gander at the three characteristics of capitalism I proposed above in this same thread.
Clearly false. Huge monopolies grew virtually without bound in the 19th century when there was no regulation to speak of. In fact, 19th century America is about as close to a “pure capitalism” as has ever existed on Earth. Yet, all of the negative aspects of capitalism expressed themselves, write large.
For information on the current state of affairs, Znet maintains a huge repository of essays and articles on global economics: Global Economics
They also host a site which lays out an alternative path: Participatory Economics
This is quite possibly the most inane comment I have ever seen. Mayhap thou hast not noticed it, but yes, Americans do love their government and economic systems and think every would be better off for them. There’s neither shame nor shadow in it.
You’ve been begging for insults this whole thread with your lack of adequate debate. js_africanus has tried to debate and you’ve done nothing.
But capitalism never exists in a vaccuum. Moreover, you’ve looked at a few very large examples and ignored all the counter evidence: there were and are thousands of fields and companies and markets that have never gotten near a monopoly. There was a Standard Oil. But there were also a bunch of food companies that were not a monopoly at all.
Chumpsky, you are looking only at what you wish to see.
That depends on who you mean by “Americans.” It is common in today’s intellectual culture to equate the ruling class with “Americans.” So, by this convention, you are correct, obviously.
However, if we depart from convention and use the term “Americans” to mean “citizens of the United States of America,” then you are surely wrong. Indeed, for several presidential elections now, the majority has either voted “none of the above” or boycotted the process entirely. The majority of Americans feel so disconnected with the political system that they don’t participate in it at all.
Furthermore, I would like to see some documentation showing that the majority of Americans think it is OK to force a certain type of economic system on other countries. I seriously doubt that you can show a majority support for the forced privatization in countries like Nicaragua.
Actually, I take that same lethargy as evidence of satisfaction in the political and econmic process. People who feel safe and comfortable in the system feel no need to change it.
Aside from which, American politics are boring. Often, individual races are more important than ones in Europe, but just as often, they are less dramatic. Americans worked out the science to campaign management too well. We can’t even have some good, old fashion mud-slinging anymore!