The Environmental Atheist

I posted a comment on that blog, and I'll post one here as well.

What is evil about capitalism? What do you think would fix it? Is it unrestrained capitalism, the kind that Marx described? That kind of capitalism no longer exists.

Wars are not fought because of capitalism. They are fought because of totalitarianism and tribalism, in many forms. Totalitarians take what they want (or try to), by force if necessary. Whatever economic system you set up, they will still go after what they want.

Have you read Karl Popper's "The Open Society and Its Enemies"? If not, you might find it interesting.
 

Allow me to include a little snippet of a debate I recently had with someone:

"It might be that the invisible hand of the market has a point in invading Iraq. Of course it has little concern for human lifes. Now we again switch to a different level: Is resource appropriation more important or are human lifes more important." (sic)

So maybe capitalism does create wars. Bush is no totalitarian, and the war is certainly not merely about territory.

"Totalitarians take what they want (or try to), by force if necessary."

Or maybe Bush and his cronies are totalitarians, and they are just using the US military as a vehicle for their greed.

"Whatever economic system you set up, they will still go after what they want."

In which case they will probably end up setting up the economic system, having taken any leverage they may have to do so by force. This also allows them to take what they want.

"What is evil about capitalism?"

When MNCs become our new feudal overlords, we'll look back on such a quaint question and laugh, supposing we are still allowed.
 

Maybe it's unfair to single out capitalism as the sole driving force behind war. Capitalism has been the dominant system of production and trade for the last few centuries. Any economic system that espouses unrestrained growth is the culprit really, especially when that growth comes at the expense of a competitor's well being.

So if not capitalism, what then shall we call it? Unrestrained growth? Greed? The invisible hand? Or the Market itself? The players in the markets that capitalism thrives in can be private citizens, organizations, governments or cooperatives, can they not? Differing economic systems are no barrier to commerce. Barring war or embargo, political systems are no barrier either. Correction. Even when nations are in conflict, there are black markets and indirect trade. I'm sure there are thousands of people in the United States smoking a Cuban cigar at this very moment. The idea of capitalism is a means to an end - the accumulation of wealth. Capitalism just dovetails nicely with democracy - the dominant political system (if not by numbers then by influence) of the past few centuries.

For my own purposes, or the purposes of this blog, the key point that I got out of Delta's post is that war is not driven by what we commonly assume it to be. It's not about god or ideologies. It's not about king or country. It's about resources. It's about wealth.

Let's be clear here. Trade is not evil. It's not vital to our survival, but it isn't inherently toxic either. Unrestrained growth is, though. When we need to expand our communities because they have run out of resources, we're doing something terribly wrong. We evolved to thrive in a particular habitat. Something within our culture changed about 10 millennia ago and led us to spread out over most of the planet. We can call it a natural process. Everything we do can be called a natural process. We're also aware of the damage that we're doing and the bitter prognosis for our own species and the rest. Unfortunately the latter meme is not the dominant one.
 

Thanks for the link Parge, I appreciate your kind comments. I added a link to your blog on my sidebar.

Brock, why do you think that unrestrained capitalism no longer exists? I don't think capitalism is "evil", but I don't think it's the best way to organize society. Just as democratic institutions are preferable to monarchies where political power is passed on through family line, democratically managed economic institutions are preferable to economic arrangements where economic power (and hence also political power) are inherited rather than earned.

Capitalism isn't the sole driving force for war. I believe that picture is too simplistic and convenient. But I do think that material conditions have very strong influences on how things pan out in history.
 

Hi Delta,

The kind words are well deserved. Thanks for the add. Good to see you're still blogging!