Your answer concedes the whole showReader comment on: 'Capitalism Has Failed Us,' NYT Reviewer Claims Submitted by Harry Binswanger (United States), Jul 16, 2018 18:17 "Maybe the issue isn't "neoliberal ideology" . . . or "capitalism," but human nature." This concedes the moral narrative to the tyranny-lovers. What's at issue is: freedom vs. slavery. That calls for a strong, confident, absolute moral stand in defense of capitalism. Capitalism is "a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned." (Rand) There cannot be such a thing "sorta rights" or "some rights but not others" or "rights held only as long as society or the Fuehrer approves." Either your life and your work are your own by right or you exist and function by permission. The ultimate, logical conclusion of the denial of rights is the Nazi death camps and the Soviet Gulag. Those are the terms to discuss this in. Not "Well, capitalism is not so bad, and there are problems with socialism." Not "Human nature isn't good enough for socialism." And to judge human nature is to make a mockery of judgment. Human nature is neither good nor bad; it is what it is and sets the standard for evaluating what can be good or bad--such as social systems. Capitalism is the *moral ideal* because it recognizes that the individual's life, by his nature as a human being, requires that he be free from governmental coercion. Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing. Submit a comment on this article Other reader comments on this item
Comment on this item |
Follow Us On:
ADVERTISEMENT |
