BaylorPRSer Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I can't for the life of me figure out what he's trying to say. This guy is a fan of Chomsky so I referenced him to try to speak his language. I am aware that Chomsky is not an anarcho-capitalist. “The capitalist worldview is the only one most of us have ever known. We see reality, experiences, events, other people, and things—in fact, everything—as objects for our personal consumption. Even religion, Scripture, sacraments, worship services, and meritorious deeds become ways to advance ourselves—not necessarily ways to love God or neighbor. The nature of the capitalist mind is that things (and often people!) are there for me. Finally, even God becomes an object for my consumption. Religion looks good on my resume, and anything deemed “spiritual” is a check on my private worthiness list. Some call it spiritual consumerism. It is not the Gospel.” Like · · Unfollow Post · Share [*] 2 people like this. [*] Christopher William Day Capitalism = anarchy. I am an anarcho-capitalist and nonreligious. So is this aimed specifically at religious capitalists? 2 hours ago · Like [*] Christopher William Day What Chomsky refers to as "real existing capitalism" is a diff story 2 hours ago · Like [*] Ellison Rhodes I find this not specifically aimed at religious people but using the language as an example of being content with the what society has fed to the masses for years. The religiousness of it is used to show the contradictory nature of Capitalism and the m...See More about an hour ago · Like [*] Christopher William Day I frame this a little more simply. If the system is voluntary, it's fine, if it involves coercion, it's evil. Take a resource based economy or anarcho-syndicalism. According to my understanding of economics, these systems won't work, but as long as I am not forced to participate, let people organize their communes how they want. I will never use force to stop them, but I expect the same courtesy in return. 32 minutes ago · Like [*] Christopher William Day I've noticed that self-serving psychology in religion as well 31 minutes ago · Like [*] Ellison Rhodes Participation should be voluntary but in a just system the benefits of participation would be the only form of coercion but any forceful act is unjust and a violation of personal sanctity regardless of the system at hand. Capitalism, with its forms of specialization, can form unjust structures due to individuals monopolizing niche markets forcing some into using their services, which the individual can unjustly exploit or produce unethically. 2 minutes ago · Like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepin Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 From my reading of it, the person is making an argument for themselves, not you. For instance: Capitalism, with its forms of specialization, can form unjust structures due to individuals monopolizing niche markets forcing some into using their services, which the individual can unjustly exploit or produce unethically This isn't meant for you because it if was, they'd not only give an explanation of justice and morality, but they'd also demonstrate why your own conception of the concepts are wrong. It is like if someone is a Marxist and is big on the labor theory of value, and you were trying to convince them of capitalism, you'd spend most of your time disproving the labor theory of value as opposed to putting a few words next to it and saying "capitalism is the best" and then proceeding to list all of the positive benefits. Lets assume that this person is right. Well, it is very difficult for someone to really understand when there is little to no argument and a bunch of words that you have no association to. It is as if a 9 year old asked a physicists a question, and they responded with "the angular momentum of the pendulum moves in a path that is always orthogonal to the vertex so that the inelastic collision with a ball at point P will result in a total transfer of the momentum into kinetic energy and the ball will travel in the tangential direction at the point of impact". It may be true, but nobody would consider that an answer because to the 9 year old, it is just a bunch of words. Similarly, if this person is right, I have no idea what they are saying and it is not my fault. Clearly this is directed at you, but I'd claim this exchange has nothing to do with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaylorPRSer Posted October 3, 2013 Author Share Posted October 3, 2013 Interesting analysis. Talking about benefits being coercive sounds like he doesn't understand what coercive means (I know he's not a dumbass and he knows what the word means, but based on this usage of the word, it's almost like he doesn't). I don't even know where to begin on capitalism and it's forms of specialization. I have no idea what that means and like you said it isn't my fault. I think I'm going to just move on I have so little to go on here I don't think the discussion could go anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts