Zonie63
Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zonie63
For the most part, I agree with your historical analysis, although respect for liberal values went through many changes, some of which didn't always see eye-to-eye with capitalism. Capitalists, just as any other citizens of our respective societies, had to adapt and roll with some of these changes which weren't perfectly in line with the principles of laissez-faire capitalism. Another thing that characterizes our societies is that we've been open enough to allow the written and spoken word to address our problems and be reasonable enough to negotiate and compromise.
I was about to say that I can't agree, Zonie, but I think you'd need to define these differences between Capitalism and Liberalism. I think I know what you're saying and had written a response, but possibly best to add some meat to the bones before I reply.
I suppose one could write whole volumes about the differences between capitalism and liberalism, although in a nutshell, I would say liberalism is about the promotion of human rights, while capitalism focuses mainly on property rights, business rights, and accumulating wealth. The only real overlap would be in the area of property rights, which are considered sacrosanct in the capitalist dogma. Liberals tend towards championing individual human rights, which would also include the rights of employees, landless tenants, and consumers (among other things). It's in these areas where capitalists and liberals have tended to differ.
For example, liberals tend to support the right of workers to collectively bargain, whereas capitalists have staunchly opposed society granting such a right to workers, essentially arguing that their property rights should trump all other considerations. Other conflicts have arisen in the area of consumer protection, where capitalists typically argue that their property rights should trump consumer rights ("caveat emptor"). Another well-known argument is in the area of environmental protection, where extolling property rights might lead one to conclude that the property owner can dump whatever chemicals he wants on his own property, while liberals typically disagree with that view.
Liberals and capitalists traditionally believed in the same set of rights and principles for society, although their main difference seems to be one of emphasis. They ostensibly differ on which rights are most important.
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zonie63
I mainly take issue with the implication that capitalism is just sooooo wonderful that it shouldn't be changed or altered in any way. That's not how our society has worked, and it's not even how capitalism has worked. Some people criticize liberalism and Protestantism, too, but those too have changed over the centuries.
There is no one I know who thinks 'Capitalism is so wonderful'. But, there may be a cultural difference here, because we are naturally sceptical of any idea or system and it's bred in the bone that we are objective and fair (which may seem like a contradiction in terms). We're not impressed by extreme politics and we fully understand that politicians are limited in what they can achieve no matter the system - this has been known here for centuries. In my opinion and experience, Americans are more idealistic, for the most part, and in this you have more in common with say France and Germany than we do.
I've encountered quite a number of American ideological capitalists who seem to think that capitalism is above reproach, and it wasn't too long ago when any criticism of capitalism might have gotten someone branded as a "pinko" or a "commie." I remember people saying things like "If you don't like capitalism, then go to Russia!" Maybe it was different in England; I can't really say, but I'd be interested in your thoughts on this. Have there ever been any "love it or leave it" types in your country?
I agree that the U.S. and U.K. have generally eschewed extremist politics, although we do so with the luxury of getting to define what "extremist politics" is from our point of view. We also shared another bit of good fortune in that the UK is an island and the US has a buffer of two oceans, so most people had to go over the water to even get to our countries. That didn't make us isolated nor invulnerable, but it did give us some breathing room and likely influenced the political development in our countries.
I'll take your word for it that Americans are more idealistic than the English, although I have no real basis of comparison regarding France and Germany. In some ways, there might be some parallels between "Manifest Destiny" and "Rule Britannia" which were powerful forms of idealism in our countries and affected our perceptions and the direction we took.
quote:
Our biggest strength is our biggest weakness in that we're not easily convinced with politics but on the other side of the coin this means we don't expect much from them (and that doesn't help at times).
It depends. A lot of people get caught up in political causes for one thing or another, but they don't seem to embrace cults of personality which have existed in other countries. The President is generally the butt of jokes in our culture, even Presidents we like. There's nothing really "holy" about politics in our country, where nothing is sacred. We also don't believe in any such thing as "royal blood," a concept which has definitely influenced politics on your side of the Atlantic.
quote:
This is a country that just finds its way as it goes along: no grand designs; no big expectations. But, things are decent enough and certainly not worth rocking the boat over. What are you going to achieve? A load of lunatics running around in Russia or France shouting about how they're going to make everyone free except that when you don't agree with them they lop your head off? There's a lot to be said for individual liberty and history demonstrates this point.
Definitely. I agree completely, except that it's hard for me to judge those "lunatics in Russia or France" so harshly, since I haven't walked in their shoes or experienced what they experienced. We've had different experiences in our countries, and to a large extent, our embracing of individual liberty was actually highly selective for most of our history. Those of a certain ethnic groups within our borders got liberty, while other ethnic groups did not get as much. Outside of our own respective homeland territory, our devotion to individual liberty has been questionable, to say the least, as history has also demonstrated.
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
quote:
ORIGINAL: Zonie63
But that's also a curious point to make in response to a thread about dishonest accounting firms and the wreckage caused by their wanton deceptions.
I don't think it is strange because I'm acknowledging there will be perceived injustice and quantifiable corruption in any system. As far as I can tell, you mentioned your opposition being to a view that 'Capitalism being so wonderful', except you're now moving away from this and you're attempting to use the scraps to prove the substance.
Not sure what you mean. I think acknowledging perceived injustice and quantifiable corruption in our system is what we do, part of the same liberal traditions which have prevented us from falling down that slippery slope towards extremism. However, that injustice and corruption must still be addressed, but it's possible that overzealous devotion to the ideal of capitalism may become an impediment to that process.
What you might see as "moving away from this" could be referring to the part where I tried to expand further and speculate as to the possible causes of this devotion to capitalism and your point about Hitler and Stalin regarding the opposition to extremism in the Anglosphere. Not that we embraced extremism ourselves, but we had to face it on a global level. That, just by itself, seems to have colored and clouded the capitalistic viewpoint. It would be one thing to argue for or against capitalism within our own countries, but once the international perspective is brought into the argument, the debate changes.
|
Capitalism and non-audit...audits. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread