Is capitalism really such a good system?

[aeolium]

I don't think that an Islamic nation like Pakistan embodies what you describe aeolium. Islam may have many positive aspirations but given that you acknowledge that in practice it disenfranchises over half the world's population as a matter of basic principle it has some serious questions to answer.

I wasn't writing as an advocate for that form of Islam, am51. I was just observing how it had spread and trying to offer some reasons for its appeal (in the same way as I am interested in the reasons for the increasing appeal of populist and nationalist parties in Europe - rather than merely attacking or dismissing them, as some do).

[amateur51]

From memory, I can't say I have, amateur51.

Why? Did you find it a rattling good yarn?

One of the issues it addresses is communal responsibilty for child-rearing at various stages of the child's life. I've put myself down for tackling dealing with waiters and wine-tasting courses ages 14-16.

I thought the book might help to free you from what is apparently tunnel-vision about child-rearing in families.

[amateur51]

I wasn't writing as an advocate for that form of Islam, am51. I was just observing how it had spread and trying to offer some reasons for its appeal (in the same way as I am interested in the reasons for the increasing appeal of populist and nationalist parties in Europe - rather than merely attacking or dismissing them, as some do).

The reason that I reacted as I have is that I've failed to identify a 'successful' society (in globally co-operative terms terms) based on thsat value system. Pakistan is an extreme example, I agree.

[P. G. Tipps]

One of the issues it addresses is communal responsibilty for child-rearing at various stages of the child's life. I've put myself down for tackling dealing with waiters and wine-tasting courses ages 14-16.

I thought the book might help to free you from what is apparently tunnel-vision about child-rearing in families.

What has any of that irrelevant nonsense got to do with whether capitalism is 'a good system' or not ... ?

[amateur51]

What has any of that irrelevant nonsense got to do with whether capitalism is 'a good system' or not ... ?

You were chewing on about most people thinking of their families first etc., presumably as a given of human nature. I merely provided an opportunity for you to think outside the box.

Not sure what part of that you're struggling with.

[P. G. Tipps]

You were chewing on about most people thinking of their families first etc., presumably as a given of human nature. I merely provided an opportunity for you to think outside the box.

Not sure what part of that you're struggling with.

You're correct, it now does seem even more of a struggle ...

Are you suggesting we shouldn't put our own offspring and other loved ones first?

If not, can you indicate to whom or what we should give our undivided priority of attention to instead?

[Richard Barrett]

Regarding pessimism, I just came across this from an interview with Ralph Nader:

TC: When it comes to human nature and human behavior, would you describe yourself as an optimist or a pessimist?
RN: Pessimism has no function. It’s an indulgence of people who have little stamina to confront the challenges of modern life. And it’s a good way to rationalize their withdrawal from the work of participating in the great work of human beings, which is, as Senator Daniel Webster said, justice.

P G Tipps, you were invited by amateur51 to "think outside the box" but you don't seem to see that there is an outside to your box.

[Serial_Apologist]

You're correct, it now does seem even more of a struggle ...

Are you suggesting we shouldn't put our own offspring and other loved ones first?

If not, can you indicate to whom or what we should give our undivided priority of attention to instead?

The very question reveals the moral bankruptsy implicit in the assumed freedom of choice apologists such as yourself pur forward in your bid on behalf of the present system.

[amateur51]

You're correct, it now does seem even more of a struggle ...

Are you suggesting we shouldn't put our own offspring and other loved ones first?

If not, can you indicate to whom or what we should give our undivided priority of attention to instead?

Not having any children or direct dependents I choose to focus my attention on the neediest of my fellow citizens.

[P. G. Tipps]

Regarding pessimism, I just came across this from an interview with Ralph Nader:

TC: When it comes to human nature and human behavior, would you describe yourself as an optimist or a pessimist?
RN: Pessimism has no function. It’s an indulgence of people who have little stamina to confront the challenges of modern life. And it’s a good way to rationalize their withdrawal from the work of participating in the great work of human beings, which is, as Senator Daniel Webster said, justice.

P G Tipps, you were invited by amateur51 to "think outside the box" but you don't seem to see that there is an outside to your box.

I think 'invited' is a rather gentle way of putting it, Richard Barrett .. <laugh>

As for 'pessimism' how about the communist/socialist claim that the collapse of capitalism is 'inevitable'.? Sounds like the very epitome of pessimism to me!

As, too, for this intriguing, figurative 'box' ... ironically, the word in this contest is straight out of capitalist corporate management-speak! ... wouldn't it be rather better to make sure our own little 'boxes' are satisfactory before trying to mess about outside with others'?

[P. G. Tipps]

The very question reveals the moral bankruptsy implicit in the assumed freedom of choice apologists such as yourself pur forward in your bid on behalf of the present system.

Quite possibly, but you haven't answered the question, have you ... ?

[amateur51]

As for 'pessimism' how about the communist/socialist claim that the collapse of capitalism is 'inevitable'.? Sounds like the very epitome of pessimism to me!

Sounds quite optimistic to me

[P. G. Tipps]

Not having any children or direct dependents I choose to focus my attention on the neediest of my fellow citizens.

I can only congratulate you on your exemplary social conscience, amateur51 ...

However, those with dependants may well have a more immediate priority 'inside the box'!

[amateur51]

I can only congratulate you on your exemplary social conscience, amateur51 ...

However, those with dependants may well have a more immediate priority 'inside the box'!

Your choice, Tippster.

[Serial_Apologist]

Quite possibly, but you haven't answered the question, have you ... ?

Well I got as near as I could to it at an earlier point in the thread:

http://www.for3.org/forums/showthread.php?11529-Is-capitalism-realy-such-a-good-system.page2

Messages #11 and #20.

Historically the one-party model came down from Stalinism because most countries attempting to go beyond capitalism have not been favoured circumstances propitious to the model Lenin laid down in State and Revolution, which foresaw in the dictatorship of the proletariat a huge expansion of democracy, but not having any experiences other than the 1889 Paris Commune to go on, could not have foreseen the consequences of revolution in a comparatively backward economy such as that of Russia in 1917.

The moral problem of support to a revolution in a country or conditions not ready for it, was answered by Lenin in relation to the 1916 Easter Uprising: the people may not be fully prepared in such a way as to guarantee a successful uprising, but who can criticise their fight against injustice and oppression or ask for a postponement until a time we deem correct?

Were the ruling class prepared to countenance their own decommissioning by way of parliamentary electoral legitimacy the issue of multi-party pluralism would not arise; the unfortunate thing is that Chile offers the last opportunity classic left reformism had to demonstrate a peaceful road to securing the latter: remember, it wasn't revolutionaries who were urging or carrying out the violence on that occasion.