Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Okay, in the "Hulu's charging for content" thread in Entertainment I made the comment that Capitalism is amoral as it makes no claims regarding its morality or immorality. Stego responded that Capitalism was "immoral."Accepting that assertion as true for the sake of discussion what economic system is "moral"? Not more moral than Capitalism but simply "moral" by definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relic Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Accepting that assertion as true for the sake of discussion what economic system is "moral"?No such thing as far as i know. Almost a contradiction in terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kungtotte Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Communism springs to mind. Nobody is tasked harder than they can manage, everybody receives according to their needs.But of course, when you're just discussing the system, in a vacuum, it's easy to reach conclusions about the morality of the respective systems. In the real world, things are different, and I would argue that all systems are immoral in practice.ETAI should add that I don't really think much about the inherent morality of economical systems. No matter which is in place, people end up getting shafted anyway :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potsherds Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 But of course, when you're just discussing the system, in a vacuum, it's easy to reach conclusions about the morality of the respective systems. In the real world, things are different, and I would argue that all systems are immoral in practice.Agreed.Every economic system works wonderfully in a vacuum, and none of them work perfectly in the real world. And all systems are vulnerable to immorality, in as much as these systems are run by people some of which are clever enough and corrupt enough to use the system for personal gain despite the consequences to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brude Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 I think Capitalism as a concept is amoral, but how it is applied in the real world (at least in modern U.S. society since the Industrial Revolution) is most of the time immoral. The notion that there should be no constraints on a system which by its structure allows for those at the very top to have almost complete control over the lives of those at the bottom and quite literally oppress them (yes, I said OPPRESS them) is fundamentally flawed. It's structure does allow for some massive benefits that are good for society, but when totally unconstrained the faults can pretty outweigh these better aspects. Unconstrained, Capitalism is downright sociopathic and even murderous, never mind totally destructive to the environment, all for the sake of profit of a few people at the very top.I am not saying that other systems can't be abused in similar ways, but when it comes to Capitalism I think it can work if it's strictly managed so that it doesn't overwhelm those at the bottom and doesn't overwhelm the increasingly limited resources of the entire world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datepalm Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 I think any economic system is a highly imperfect tool, it has no inherent morality in itself. Capitalism, and communism, and so on, are integral parts of wider societies that do have underlying ideologies, which have their views, more, less and not at all moral about how humans should exist. Asking whether the economic system of the USSR or Nazi Germany was moral is impossible - its part of executing whatever they were going for there. The same is true of modern capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 It's the people who control the system that make it moral or immoral if you look at the theory behind communism it seems great everyones equal and everyone gets an equal piece of the pie, in practice it sucks. Capitalism seems pretty good to ,the market will make it so everything works out, but again in practice not even close. Given the right people both systems could work and be moral but it just doesn't work that way.Better to go with a mix of the two with more of a leaning toward capitalism. That way you can avoid most of the serious problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Oop North Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Whatever the Care Bears have running in the Kingdom of Caring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nous Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 I do not consider capitalism immoral or even amoral; I consider it the most moral and just system devised so far. I am not primarily opposed to various other systems, such as communism or fascism because they are impractical, although they are. They are immoral to the root and that is the reason I hate them.The separation between the political and economical when discussing systems is a tenuous one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 25, 2009 Author Share Posted October 25, 2009 To follow up. I agree with those who say there isn't a "moral" economic system used by humans. I think the best we can achive is amoral (I'm not saying captialism is the only amoral system). I do personally prefer capitalism. That said I think any system is only as good as the moral principals the people in that system cleve to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relic Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 To follow up. I agree with those who say there isn't a "moral" economic system used by humans. I think the best we can achive is amoral (I'm not saying captialism is the only amoral system). I do personally prefer capitalism. That said I think any system is only as good as the moral principals the people in that system cleve to.I prefer something that provides equality to all involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pita Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Pitaism is moral. It's when people give me all of their stuff. It should work out, though it's never been implemented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 25, 2009 Author Share Posted October 25, 2009 Relic,As long as there are humans involved some will rise above others. Even in those systems that purport to create equality. I doubt Pol Pol ever worked as hard as the people who's labor he conscripted. Same with Stalin. Lenin, and Mao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kungtotte Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Champions of communism would argue that there has never been a true communist society. It's supposed to go like this (simplified):* Capitalist or otherwise unwanted economical system.* Revolution of the Proletariat, the workers seize all power and put an interim government in place.* Redistribution of resources, making sure everything runs smoothly in this well-oiled apparatus.* The interim government is abolished, and everybody lives happily ever after in the class-less, state-less society.Everybody gets stuck on the second step, because people like Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin and Castro find out that they come to like the power they get.I think we've been closer to true capitalism than we've ever been to true communism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solmyr Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 The words "system" and "moral", when used together, form a powerful oxymoron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripper Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 In a capitalist society the superior goal for the entire society becomes to increase the profits, to make capital grow more and more. Capitalism once was progressive and expanded production, but now it has become a threat to humanity, culture and nature. Socialism on the other hand is a very expanded form of democracy where collective rationality is the central principle. We would collectively own the natural resources and means of production on which we are always dependant. Of cource you could still own a garden (natural resource), a computer or various other tools - but not a mine or an entire factory. Socialism does not mean that people can't be different, and that you can't make more money (or rather labor vouchers) if you work more hours. You could still work harder and thus afford to buy more things. But there would no longer be a division between those who work and those who owns; larger business would be owned collectively by the people and managed by the workers who works there.The difference between capitalism and socialism is that in capitalism people serve the economy, while in socialism the economy serve the people. A socialism society is not necessarily moral, but at least we have the choice to make it moral. We don't really have that in capitalism, sure we could vote but politics must always adopt to the capitalist reality. It must follow the same logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kungtotte Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 The difference between capitalism and socialism is that in capitalism people serve the economy, while in socialism the economy serve the people.In theory, yes. But in reality, people always end up serving the economy regardless of economical system :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 25, 2009 Author Share Posted October 25, 2009 Ripper,Could you please offer a real world example of this socialist paridise you describe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 The only elements that define capitalism are that all exchange must be voluntary, contracts are enforced, and private property rights are protected. That's a moral system that comes from a set of moral values. Once any of those elements are violated, it's no longer capitalism. Whether a free market produces the best outcome is based on a subjective judgement of those outcomes. But capitalism is not moral because of the outcomes it produces. A free market is moral because it's the natural product of a belief in voluntary exchange, and free exchange is the fundamental moral principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 In a capitalist society the superior goal for the entire society becomes to increase the profits, to make capital grow more and more.Capitalism has nothing to say about the motives of the parties engaging in exchange, only that the exchange is voluntary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.