Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46

Thread: Is the capitalist mode of production unjust?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    4,381


    Default Is the capitalist mode of production unjust?

    I'm interested to hear people's personal philosophies on this...

    My gut response as a person who is not an expert on this subject is that it is an injustice. The justification for this mode of production seems to be that people that own capital deserve to be rewarded and that rewarding people who develop new capital incentivizes the rest of the citizenry. My main problem is that I don't think these two notions justify the problems that capitalism causes. The other problem I have is that, while most folks will agree that innovators and risk takers need to be rewarded, I don't think most people agree that they deserve the amounts of wealth that some of the richest people have.
    When they said "sit down", I stood up.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    632


    Default

    I would suggest this film when talking about production models.
    http://video.google.se/videoplay?doc...05277695921912

    However yes, i believe the current model is unjust. But rathest of all i think the model is outdated. That your material living standard is based on the sales of one specific product or a service on the market very much feels like an 1800s system today. This is not to say capitalism shouldent have existed, only that by time it has become hard to justify as potential options arise.
    =======>CLICK HERE IF YOU DONT FEEL LIKE CLICKING ANYWHERE ELSE!<=======

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Akron, Ohio
    Posts
    10


    Lightbulb Just a Thought...

    Let us first look at Karl Marx (careful now-- We may be flagged as communists). Marx was the one who first placed the terms. Granted, some of his philosophy and scientific arguments are dated: but they were very relavent at the time. Marx was the first philosopher to engage the economists and break it down. The bottom line with Marx: capitalism will murder capitalism.

    This stated, we have to look at the varying modes of production: so where are we talking about? I'm going to roll with the whole idea of capitalistic modes of production developed in the 16th century over in Europe (and it has since expanded and become far more complex than most people can wrap their heads around). The capitalistic mode of production is present in various societies, however some societies place more emphasis on the social realms of their system and others... Well, just look at America compared to England. Similar modes of production, however England places more of an emphasis on the social nature of people within the economy.

    And this is the mode of production, taking into account the social necessities. Pure capitalistic modes of production do not do this... The whole concept (according to Marx) originated in the early 16th century: merchant capital... Eh, it's hard to go into the great detail I wish to... But I'd have to think it out longer. My suggestion though, if you want to understand the concept better... Look into Karl Marx and press onward from there: here-in lies the answers which you seek.

    Supply and demand, wage labour, proletariat, capitalists, bourgeoisie, ...it's all there.. Peter Kavisto wrote a good book that outlines a lot of the sociological concepts (such as this) and articulates the main arguments (I still suggest reading the original pieces, but if you're pressed for time it will do). The book is called KEY IDEAS OF SOCIOLOGY.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,166


    Default

    My personnal thought is that capitalism is responsible for more death than communism. Only it's indirect.

    So yeah, pretty unfair.
    ___________________________________________

    All the Beautiful Things you do

    Respect my authoritah !

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Vodka Belt
    Posts
    3,270


    Default

    Capitalism is not just highly unjust, it is also ineffective. I classify myself as an anti-capitalist, but I'm not completely sure what alternative economic model I would prefer. There are many which are better than capitalism, but which one is the best, both theoretically and practically? It won't do any good if you've got the best hypothetical theory if it cannot be done in praxis and I think it's important people have that in mind. Lately, I've been looking into Participatory economics which could be a good alternative.

    Also, which road should one take to abolish capitalism? For me, I would like to see as few as possible people get hurt, and political revolutions have rarely been peaceful. In my country, the general feeling is that the free market should be more and more restrained. It is not impossible to think that, through peaceful political means, capitalism will be gradually removed, until it is gone.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paint_It_Black View Post
    I don't grab tits. I have tits thrust upon me.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Truth Avenue
    Posts
    563


    Default

    Capitalism is a system of opportunity. I'd be willing to kill anybody who tried to abolish it in this country.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cascadian Exile
    Posts
    19,609


    Default

    1. As much as Satanic_Surfer is a nice guy, you really should ignore anyone who posts links to Zeitgeist or the Venus Movement when it comes to talking about capitalism. It's mostly nice-sounding nonsense.

    2. 'Capitalist mode of production' is a uniquely Marxist term, most people will be unfamiliar with what that means, especially since 'capitalism' means exactly the same thing and is more broadly understood.

    3. The essence of Marxist theory isn't about just or unjust distribution. The core of the Marxist theory of economics is that capitalism isn't efficient. Certainly recent events show that fairly well. Marxism is a critique of capitalism in that sense.

    The most obvious example of that is how a backwards country like Russia, which was sparsely industrialized by the early 20th century was able to rapidly move forward and eventually equal the US in power and strength. (China also another good example.) Or you can look at the failures of capitalism in the 3rd world, and the failures of libertarian market reforms in the 3rd world vs. the success of other types of reforms in economics.
    Quote Originally Posted by T-6005 View Post
    I do no be following, fortune prick me if I do no.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    4,381


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelchairman View Post
    The essence of Marxist theory isn't about just or unjust distribution. The core of the Marxist theory of economics is that capitalism isn't efficient. Certainly recent events show that fairly well. Marxism is a critique of capitalism in that sense.
    How is capitalism less efficient? I think there are many undesirable effects from capitalism, but efficiency wise, doesn't capitalism incentivize people more than any other system by offering rewards for developing capital? The only thing I can think of that makes capitalism less efficient is high levels of unemployment.

    What recent events would you say are the best examples?

    Are there branches of socialism that focus more on the unjustness of the capitalist mode of production?
    When they said "sit down", I stood up.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Vodka Belt
    Posts
    3,270


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bighead384 View Post
    How is capitalism less efficient? I think there are many undesirable effects from capitalism, but efficiency wise, doesn't capitalism incentivize people more than any other system by offering rewards for developing capital? The only thing I can think of that makes capitalism less efficient is high levels of unemployment.

    What recent events would you say are the best examples?

    Are there branches of socialism that focus more on the unjustness of the capitalist mode of production?
    How capitalism is less efficient? That's pretty obvious, isn't it. To make it really simple for you to understand, I'll give you an example. Capitalism is all about competition. Person A and person B would compete in making the best house for instance, person A using his skills and knowledge with his house and person B doing the same with his house. Marxism says "why don't you work together instead?", where both person A and B helps each other with both persons' skills and knowledge. If the house would be built together, it would be done faster and better.
    Also, you have the Marxist view that labour reflects the human. To sell your labour would be selling a part of you as a human. In capitalism, the focus is to get the job done. In Marxism, the focus is to get the job done right.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paint_It_Black View Post
    I don't grab tits. I have tits thrust upon me.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cascadian Exile
    Posts
    19,609


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bighead384 View Post
    How is capitalism less efficient? I think there are many undesirable effects from capitalism, but efficiency wise, doesn't capitalism incentivize people more than any other system by offering rewards for developing capital? The only thing I can think of that makes capitalism less efficient is high levels of unemployment.

    What recent events would you say are the best examples?

    Are there branches of socialism that focus more on the unjustness of the capitalist mode of production?
    There isn't much efficient about capitalism in America today. In every single field China and India can produce more for less, and often better. The efficiency of capitalism in America has done a good job of impoverishing the US and sending jobs to socialist nations and nations with stricter market regulations, simply because they can work for less and do it better.

    The incentive of course is that it got a handful of people marginally wealthier. There's nothing efficient about that.

    The recent events I would bring up are the recent market crashes in property, and finance. The property market was a bubble where the value of property was estimated way higher than it actually was worth. In order for the market to correct itself it had to crash. (The finance industry however came through largely unscathed, that is the lenders of shitty loans have no incentive to not give shitty loans, though those that take them got punished, despite how unpenetrably complicated those loans were.)

    Now I'm not arguing for a complete change of the mode of production. Effective market regulations have meant that the brunt of the economic crisis we feel in Denmark for instance, is essentially backwash from the American one. The social-welfare system was able to absorb the newly unemployed while keeping up their incomes until a new point where they could either get a new job, or finish an education in a new field. Remarkably simple and effective.
    Quote Originally Posted by T-6005 View Post
    I do no be following, fortune prick me if I do no.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •