vendredi 9 mai 2014

A Correspondence with an Adherent of Capitalism

He used the FB mail to keep it discreet, I will abbreviate his name, as usual in such cases. As far as I know he is a medical practitioner* and not a public person at all. He started the correspondence with a mail that referred to one of our combox exchanges, I did at first not know which one.

MK
I apology if you misunderstood me. but Hans to get some idea where you are at I have a question for you. QUESTION do you believe that you were born to have a free will? yes or no will do
HGL
No, if I misunderstood you, you cannot apologise for that, but only for being unclear. Was I born to have a free will? Very clearly YES, and I hope I still have one. What has that got to do with ANYTHING we have discussed?
MK
the reason I ask the question is because all other forms of political and philosophical reasoning boils down to only one philosophical and political belief that is in the nature of man and that is capitalism every man and woman want to capitalized on their abilities through there free will whereas all other political and philosophical does not allow man to have his freewill
HGL
Wrong, Capitalism does NOT allow every man and woman to capitalise their abilities. I just told you, big business has closed down so many small business and thereby prevented the former owners to continue to capitalise their abilities.

One of your perks with being a medical doctor (as I presume) and a free practitioner (as I presume) is that you can, free from a boss and a large administration capitalise and even more importantly use your own capabilities to their best. Whereas a boss and an administration would hamper you. Capitalism has landed lots of people in your position in non-medical lines of business into the less comfortable position of having a boss and an administration to adapt to.
MK
Capitalism allows every human being to freely choose to be the very best you can be. but now if you are talking crony capitalism you might have a point. to prove my point study after study have proven that if you ask anybody on the street if I give you this Million dollars would you take it? and 99.9% of everyone that was given that choice said yes and why is that because every human being is a capitalist at heart regardless of any philosophical or political belief. lets take something so simple and small as your boss or manager asking if you wanted a cost of living raise would you take it? of course you and I would. why? because we want to capitalize on the opportunity of making more money in order to make living a lot better for ourselves and our family. Hans do you see where I am going with this? that is why I always say to people that don't believe in Capitalism "okay I will believe in any other from of political-ISM so long as I am at the top of the food chain and am able to call the shots deal?" with that comment they now get it !! they realize that at the top of every political-ISM there has to be someone who is the top capitalist calling the shots for everyone else. Mao Stalin Pol Pot Mussolini and Franco and all the rest were capitalist at the top of their political belief system they capitalized on their opportunity and called the shots. do you understand now. do you think Karl Marx went out into the fields and picked berries with all the rest of his country men and women or do you think he stayed home and If he wasn't reading or writing or drinking or having sex with his wife and daughter he was working? the answer is NO think about it.
HGL
"Capitalism allows every human being to freely choose to be the very best you can be." About as truthful as "Communism gives to each according to his needs and takes from each according to his capacity" - i e not truthful at all.

"but now if you are talking crony capitalism you might have a point." Thank you. I think I have.

"to prove my point study after study have proven that if you ask anybody on the street if I give you this Million dollars would you take it? and 99.9% of everyone that was given that choice said yes " I would first want to know from whom. And if it had to be a million rather than less. The studies you refer to are from US which has a culture where Jews and Protestants have inculcated that Catholic detachment from money is totally unrealistic and in fact mad. You do not really mean that the studies have proven, you mean they have shown. And some things shown are not valid proof. That includes what psychological studies show. Kinsey report does not prove sex habits of US Americans, it proves the kind of people who would answer such a question were giving lewd answers. These might have been wrong answers, but anyway, the ones who answered were hardly representative.

"because we want to capitalize on the opportunity of making more money in order to make living a lot better for ourselves and our family." Sure, but for my part not at each and every price. If I got a million on my account for writing well, that is fair. If I got it on condition not to write, I would reject the offer. Because it would make me less useful for general human society, less pleasing to God and more likely to pull down a curse on my family and myself.

"that is why I always say to people that don't believe in Capitalism "okay I will believe in any other from of political-ISM so long as I am at the top of the food chain and am able to call the shots deal?" with that comment they now get it !!" A system should not be judged according to how it is on the top of the food chain, but according to how it is to the lowliest of the innocent, to the least of the brethren of Christ. Distributism is about AVOIDING the kind of food chain that the sea has between plancton at the lowest and sharks at the highest.

"Mao Stalin Pol Pot Mussolini and Franco and all the rest were capitalist at the top of their political belief system they capitalized on their opportunity and called the shots." First of all, I am not denying they capitalised for themselves. So does any political ruler in some way, monetary or non-monetary. That said, you cannot compare living as a poor person under Franco or Mussolini to living under Mao. In Italy and in Spain you were encouraged to have your little shop. You were not deprived of ownership of what you owned. Those who were already rich were not despoiled, but they were impeded from ousting the poor self employed and small employers from the market (in 1960's Franco went Capitalist and lots of farmers were driven out of their land in favour of more efficient agriculture, alas). And, if you were a big employer, you were not allowed to totally underpay your workers or neglect the needs of the retired ones. That is NOT comparable to living under Mao in a Lao Gai. China is making money out of Lao Gais. But when Franco had forced labour applied to whom he considered war criminals, it was to erect a monument over all the fallen - both sides. Valle de los Caidos. Not comparable at all.

"do you understand now. do you think Karl Marx went out into the fields and picked berries with all the rest of his country men and women" You STILL seem to be under the very strange illusion that anyone criticising Capitalism is a Marxist. No, I do not think that. But even if Che Guevara actually did that, I do not care I am still not a Marxist. But YOUR behaviour of trying to bully me into accepting your views reminds me very much of a Trotskyist I used to know. It did not work for him, will not work for you. But Trotsky was launched from New York to the Russian Revolution. Either Capitalists were doublecrossing WoodrowW ilson, or Woodrow Wilson was as dishonest to the Czar as the Kaiser was, who let Lenin pass through Berlin. Where the Zeus altar, the seat of Satan was already then and is to this day.

As to Marx, I agree with José Antonio in one of his speeches: he was a talented Jew, who saw the PROBLEM of Capitalism, but NOT the SOLUTION to it. I also agree with Lyndon LaRouche that he severely underestimated the role of USURY (lending 100€ and getting 106€ back a year later, for instacne), in impoverishing the already poor and enriching the already rich. And, as he underestimated the role of usury, he put it down to private property instead, that was his faulty analysis even of the problem.


* In one of the combox debates, he had told a friend, that as some ask people coming with lung cancer or heart problems if they smoke his first question to someone with uterus cancer and a few more conditions is if they have had abortions. It is usually medical practitioners who ask that sort of question to anyone./HGL

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire