Yes.The best way to regulate a system, is when you have governance influenced by the people involved. — Philosophim
The best way to regulate a system, is when you have governance influenced by the people involved.
While it is not perfect, as no one ideology ever is, people always have some type of say and influence to minimize the implementation of the winners destroying the playing field for everyone else. — Philosophim
How does separating the state and economy lead to a plutocracy? — NOS4A2
:100: :smirk:The literal only people who believe in laissaz-faire are idiots who have been sold the fantasy of it and take it to mean: no state intervention that would interfere with capitalists getting their way. — StreetlightX
But to market fundamentalists, I’m sure it’s still the governments fault — Xtrix
I look around and see competing interests competing for state power. — NOS4A2
All of them intervene in the economy through the very means you defend — NOS4A2
yet we’re supposed to act aghast when they seize and use them. But it doesn’t follow that the absence of those means leads to them seizing them. — NOS4A2
What it means in practice is simply: the violent demolition of any democratic control over how people live their lives, turned over instead to tiny minorities of people and entities with enormous amounts of money. Laissz-fair is a myth, and so is the meme - and it is nothing but a meme - of the fake antagonism between government and economy. — StreetlightX
But the state is a monopoly of the kind you describe, destroying the playing field for everyone else, and willing to maintain it with compulsion and violence, with free reign to wage war, dominate each other, and ensure no one has any way of beating them again. Unfettered statism seems to me the greater threat than some entity from a game. — NOS4A2
Laissez-faire: not only hasn’t existed but cannot exist. An idiotic ideal fabricated to justify plutocracy.
What believers in laissez-faire ultimately are is anti-democracy. Look no further than the way these deluded proponents defend corporate governance (zero democracy) while attacking political governance (some democracy) — all while throwing around words like “liberty.” — Xtrix
My own view is that the state is formed through conquest and confiscation. I don’t believe in any social contract theory. — NOS4A2
If there are no positions of power for the plutocrats to occupy, it doesn’t follow that the absence of these positions of power leads to plutocracy. — NOS4A2
We can point to existing state structures and say “that is plutocracy” until the cows come home, but we are no less pointing to the state. Plutocrats can achieve control through democratic means. — NOS4A2
What you haven’t done is shown how laissez-faire leads to plutocracy, is all I’m saying. — NOS4A2
:clap: :100:And what I’m saying is laissez faire doesn’t lead to anything. Because it’s a fantasy.
The IDEA or the GOAL of “free markets” and a “separation of state and economy”, however, while both fantasies, do serve as a nice stories for the ruling class— who know very well it’s complete bullshit.
It’s a nice utopian fantasy, though. Too bad it has such awful real world effects by deluding people into defending the corporate takeover of America — Xtrix
Well then, at the very least, the correlation between 'laissez-faire' and 'plutocracy' is (almost) +1 and so "how the former leads to the latter" is moot for the purposes of this thread discussion.Cite an example of laissez-faire nation-state that isn't, in effect, a plutocracy / oligopoly.
— 180 Proof
I don’t think such a regime has existed. — NOS4A2
In the fictional universe of Star Trek, the Prime Directive (also known as "Starfleet General Order 1", "General Order 1", and the "non-interference directive") is a guiding principle of Starfleet that prohibits its members from interfering with the natural development of alien civilizations. — Wikipedia
I’ll try to clarify. If there are no positions of power for the plutocrats to occupy, it doesn’t follow that the absence of these positions of power leads to plutocracy. We can point to existing state structures and say “that is plutocracy” until the cows come home, but we are no less pointing to the state. Plutocrats can achieve control through democratic means.
What you haven’t done is shown how laissez-faire leads to plutocracy, is all I’m saying. — NOS4A2
The state doesn't create capitalists, capitalists create the state. — ArmChairPhilosopher
the separation of the state and economy? — NOS4A2
Humanities natural state when given free reign is to wage war, kill each other, dominate each other, and have someone come out on top that seeks to control everyone else — Philosophim
My dear gracious good god... Where did you grow up? Ah, of course...you're a philosopher! — Hillary
The brain of a fruit fly is insignificant, and yet this primitive need for dominance still exists. It is a powerful drive in almost every living creature. In fact, I want to ask what was your motivation when you wrote your reply? Read it again. Was it done to educate me? Reach out and connect with me? No. You did it to for status. To ridicule me and put yourself on top — Philosophim
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.