Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?

[labelwench]

Why do you think that intellectuals oppose capitalism? Or, in general, they oppose the power?
Originally posted by Guille

Back to the original topic of this thread, it being timely at this stage in global economics.

There is no consensus on the definition of capitalism, nor how it should be used as an analytical category.[1] There are a variety of historical cases over which it is applied, varying in time, geography, politics and culture.[2] Economists, political economists and historians have taken different perspectives on the analysis of capitalism. Scholars in the social sciences, including historians, economic sociologists, economists, anthropologists and philosophers have debated over how to define capitalism, however there is little controversy that private ownership of the means of production, creation of goods or services for profit in a market, and prices and wages are elements of capitalism.[3]
From Wiki

Capitalism, with all of it's inadequacies, is still a system that allows for the broadest participation of society.

Perhaps what most intelligent people recognize, is that how successful one can be remains tied to the same criteria as 'the law of the jungle'. Those with genetic, geographic and technical advantage will use this system to their personal benefit. Still within such system, there is room for enterprise on all scales of economy and many stories of diminutive beginnings to grand designs accomplished. People are very resourceful.

Equality is an ideal. It anchors our ethics and separates us from other species, to some degree.

In the end, no matter what system is used, our nature, when stressed, shall ever revert to the default of 'law of the jungle', which many interpret as having no remorse or mercy. An observation of natural systems will demonstrate that there is great tolerance between species, which is only challenged under times of duress. All is connected, and the law of the jungle only serves to maintain balance.

It is a human concept to disagree with the order of the natural system, of which we are but a part.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism...?
Equilibriation...

Let me state it simply. The mind, the more educated, develops the habit of natural equilibriating logic. This logic is against capitalism because it is not equilibriated, it is a dis-equilibriating class system, even though I support it more than the other wrecks. What may be required is a mixed equilibriated economic system of truly balanced supply and demand, then maybe the intellectuals could support it. But don't tell the intellectuals, they fear what they don't think of!

Salvation of Philosophy...

I agree with you Guille, philosophy and all of modern intellectualism is in a crises, and I would say it started in the late sixties and seventies. Will we solve our problems? Yes, a resounding yes, because we are being forced to by global circumstances in most all of the critical fields, especially economics and philosophy. Will we get past the last part of your above paragraph? Yes, of course we will, but we are going to have to realize we need TOE's in all the critical fields of life's important systems. We need interdisciplinary integration in the worst of ways. That was my reason for mentioning equilibrium. Most are unaware how important a change that's taken place in most disciplines with the Bayes-Nash Equilibriums, and their newest refinements. Many have compared Nash's achievements with that of DNA, and I think it more important, it's just most are unaware of its varried interdisciplinary applications for integrations and new understandings.

Just as an example, few realize that Boolean and Bayesian machine logic, used not only by Google, but also most of the capitalist financial world is surpassing and usurping human logic on a global scale. Just look reasonably at the situation. An item costs ten cents in China and ten dollars in the U.S. There's something wrong here. The greatest dis-equilibrium in world history is taking place, with computer trades pushing the corporations, at the expense of humans' general welfare. The centropic issue we must awake to is the irrational predictions which exist in Bayes-Nash equilibriums, that create real dis-equilibriums, the world now truly faces. I think the entire world, except for a few contrarian economists, is asleep on this one. They must be awakened by inventing TOE's anywhere, in any field, to attract attention to the world's true problems. Nash won the Nobel prize for his work in the fifties in 1995 - better late than never.

p.s.
Another of my favorite philosophers is J.M.Keynes [a true genius in probability logic, as were Boole, Bayes and Nash]
BTW, Huygens was Liebniz's professor and Newton's mentor.

Utopia...

Hi SubVersion, here's one for ya. "The true equilibrium of greed can create economic utopias." Let's turn it all over to a philanthropic computer, programmed absolutely benign. The problem with true anarchy is that humans are not nice as youth likes to think. I am much older, and I see humans as far less than capable of living without law. Maybe less government, but not without law - we are bad, and my experience teaches me, we always will be, so we need systems geared to equilibriate our dastardly nature.

Equilibriated Capitalism and Ideation

Guille, ever since the dawn of time, the most difficult thing to recognize has been the irrational dis-equilibria that was actually the largest controlling entity of a particular era's history. As a few examples, who whould have thought to believe that Christianity could have taken over the logic of Egypt, Greece, Rome, at that time? Who would have believed at the time of the Renaissance that a few men's thoughts and ideas would put logic and science back on top of religion? At the founding of America, who at the time would have believed that common sense could have over-ruled the power of all the world's greatest powers, of the era? These are all examples of irrational expectations creating massive re-equilibriums of not only society, but global re-alignments of society. For anyone not to recognize the importance of equilibria and dis-equilibria, as one of the world's most important mathematical histories, I pitty us all.

Guille, you'd be all alone on this one amongst economists. In my and many others opinions, Keynes' is by far still the most important economist in the world even today. No economic/philosopher of such stature has stepped to the plate to displace this one man's achievements and importance to the future, not even Nash, even though Nash's equilibrium and probability theories are a welcome addition to Keynes... And, without respect of the formal and practical, we're all going to hell in a hand-basket, on fire. There's no more to philosophy than the over-arching system of thought and or ideation, of all the world's great thinkers, and not just the ones, one personally chooses. If the world would do no more than integrate, Charles Sanders Peirce, John Maynard Keynes, and John Nash, we could do more to solving the world's problems than all other minds on this planet combined. A bit rash, yes, but that important. We must get back to real philosophy, as even mentioned by Plato, about his solution of international equilibriated money.

Guille, your teenager philosophy needs to become integral. It needs to achieve a deep centropic integrated view of all - a total vision-logic. As Godel mentioned, we need to define the concept of the concept. We must develop trans-finite reason and logic. In other words, we must perceive the truest mathematical/nature/technology/science concept with a much more thorough direct cognition. The ideation of true equilibria rules the future, or we're all dead!


Naive Utopianism...

The above is the definition of naive utopianism. I am not about naieve utopianism of individuals, as this would be impossible as you have mentioned. When I use the term, I am simply referring to realist utopias, which are no more than major improvements to existing global legal, political, and economic systems - the real world. The other side of the coin you have mentioned is consciousness raising. The East has tried this for thousands of years of total failure. Their best advocates say they have achieved 1% to 2% at best, toward any true improvement, on the road to enlightenment. So, I easily abandon the path of emotions, for logic, thank you.

And, logically, scientific utopian systems building, first with our ideation, then with knowledge sharing, and finally implementation in the real world, is the only recourse left to a humanity, rapidly using the false logic of emotion, to burry the world, in such useless rhetoric, sophism, and solipsism. Please, try to see that all the avenues of realist, idealist thinking have not been emptied of chances for major improvements. It only takes a large enough ideation to see a true future universal justice, we all can attain. Open your minds, away from the academic foolishness of closed mindedness and exclusion, and toward that of true self-insight of better possible worlds. Deep self-ideation can see the world I speak of. It's not just a dream, it's a true possible reality. Laws can be evolved to true universal justice - period.

Casino...

The true equilibrium of supply and demand would be; The equilibrium of supply and demand, in competition with its truly balanced self, i.e., competition self-reflected into its true self. We, at present, only have dis-equilibriated supply and demand, globally. Supply and demand need be newly legally arranged in competition with itself, inside each country's domain. In other words, we need put money in competition with money, not the present system of currency in competition with currency[external money competition]. When money competes on an internal level playing field of equilibriated legal competition, it will have the power to balance greed, in an entirely new dynamic. This is not a new system, it's been partially suggested since the Greeks[external exchange clearing vs. the newer internal exchange clearing and triple entry banking]. It's just nobody has fought hard enough to implement it, except Keynes and Einzig, but they lost the battles in the forties. We need take up where John Maynard Keynes and Dr. Paul Einzig left off. Paul Davidson, Jane DaRista and Robert Skidelsky are also fighting hard for Keynes' system to be expanded and implemented. I think that without a true economic and mathematical philosophical understanding, most all philosophical discussion ends being moot. We need larger centropic integrations of inter-disciplinary studies, to really and truly see the real world, for what it realistically is. We need a further centropic integration of the world's megalomaniacs, in all fields of study.


Baudrunner, were you to possess a full knowledge of true Keynesianism, you would know that Keynes' bancor was a debt forgiveness, self-liquidating capitalist system of great superiority over the foolish system of gross exploitation, we now function under... Herein lies the greatest problem of the modern world, the Keynesian interpretation you offer is also the one most believe it to be. This is really a shame, as the real Keynesian system, properly understood, could solve our problems, almost overnight. I have written three books on this very topic, published them on the web, and had very little success in achieving understanding of the ideas. So, I deleted all three e-books and am working on updates, based in pure mathematical logic. I think if I prove my system expansion of Keynesianism with tautological logic, as I write it, maybe it will have more impact than what I previously wrote. If not, oh well, to hell with the world...

[labelwench]

Great of you to carry forward those summaries from your posts earlier on the thread, Lloyd. I was going to get around to that next but had to vacate the premises and hie me to my venue of employment.

Here's an interesting footnote that I see as relevent.

A Mexican Billionaire has surpassed Bill Gates as the richest man in the world. Given the general poverty of that country, the reaction of it's citizens is mixed. Still, it speaks to my point that the cream shall ever rise to the top. There are certain structures that exist in nature that follow logical order and will not be shaped to follow philosophy, no matter that we might wish it otherwise.

The whole story at this link.

http://news.aol.ca/article/mexican-s...st%2F786566%2F

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Still, it speaks to my point that the cream shall ever rise to the top. There are certain structures that exist in nature that follow logical order and will not be shaped to follow philosophy, no matter that we might wish it otherwise.

Yeah true enough, but only until the world awakes, and realizes it has the power to pass laws against these greedy flakes__Just as America did at the end of the 19th century, and then again after `29. Washington and Hamilton also took care of business, at the founding of the nation__Proper treasury, banking, taxing, spending, currency, trade and tariff laws__The fundamental level playing field...

How quick the world forgets its true soul...

[RascalPuff]

Yeah true enough, but only until the world awakes, and realizes it has the power to pass laws against these greedy flakes__Just as America did at the end of the 19th century, and then again after `29. Washington and Hamilton also took care of business, at the founding of the nation__Proper treasury, banking, taxing, spending, currency, trade and tariff laws__The fundamental level playing field...

How quick the world forgets its true soul...

Avid advocate and practitioner of democracy, capitalism and free enterprise here.
IMO, the lobbyists on K Street in Wa., D.C. have 'influence' - disproportionate to their numbers and proportionate to their 'contributions'. Putting a price tag on Democracy seems a dangerous contradiction of its reason for being. Acknowledging that a lot of folks are indeed aware of this compromise of Democracy, though it continues, mainly because it is 'legal' and permitted to carry on, I suppose. Truly Yours doesn't reckon that congress and the senate are going to vote against the golden egg producing goose, as it were. Is this not a dilemma, and how might it be resolved in a Democratic manner (which benefits the most number of people for the longest period of time)?

[Mikal]

Wouldn't you think Intellectuals oppose Capitalism because they suffer from a Control complex...also greed never wants anyone else to have a piece of the pie....I mean thats what it seems like to me...the profit has got to be all theirs....


Regards Mikal

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Avid advocate and practitioner of democracy, capitalism and free enterprise here.
IMO, the lobbyists on K Street in Wa., D.C. have 'influence' - disproportionate to their numbers and proportionate to their 'contributions'. Putting a price tag on Democracy seems a dangerous contradiction of its reason for being. Acknowledging that a lot of folks are indeed aware of this compromise of Democracy, though it continues, mainly because it is 'legal' and permitted to carry on, I suppose. Truly Yours doesn't reckon that congress and the senate are going to vote against the golden egg producing goose, as it were. Is this not a dilemma, and how might it be resolved in a Democratic manner (which benefits the most number of people for the longest period of time)?

Seriously RP, I don't believe there's hardly a soul in America(and possibly the entire world) truly realizes what the real problems are. Everybody's so concentrated on personal and corporate corruption, they can't even begin to see the greater problem of their own understanding of the real problem, creating these lesser problems. It's not the problem of executing the goose that's laying the golden eggs, it's creating a bigger goose__to lay more golden eggs__with new laws__that's truly needed...

Nobody seems to understand, this is a simple problem of nothing more than 'The fundamental level playing field'__'Proper treasury, banking, taxing, spending, currency, trade and tariff laws...' Then, all global wealth would be increased. At present, wealth profits are just running for the tax-havens, and all gov's are dumping the tax burden off on its unsuspecting citizens. Leveling the corrupt and imbalanced international playing field of bad currency laws, to good currency laws, would contribute massively to global credit productivity for all citizens alike__Poor to Rich__Thus allowing self-liquidating national debts__for the first time in global history... Yet, this is how dumb the entire world truly is__This same idea(or very similar) was first suggested by Plato, some 2400 years ago, and again by Ben Franklin in 1741, then by J.M.Keynes in the 1930's__and since by many others, including myself...

It's not a point of punishing one class to enrich another__It's about developing the knowledge, intelligence and wisdom to enrich everyone at once__Globally__Ratio-Money-Logically...

If all nations %-Ratio-Money-Print together, all national debts can be sliding-time-scaled, crude-printed down, with no loss to any nation or capitalism(and zero danger of inflation, with proper law structure standards...)__As all would function together to eliminate the massive debt problem. Presently, we are a bunch of constitutional paper nations__We print constitutions of paper laws__Our paper laws print paper money__The paper constitution laws say the money must be lent and repaid__That's paper printing and lending paper to paper, then telling paper to repay itself__It's like robbing Peter, to pay Paul, then repay Peter, when Peter is dead__He's a tree of dead knowledge...

All we need is enough smarts to realize this circular logic, is nothing more than tautologous nonsense_of the highest order__and we need wisen up...

But, how does one get people to see the truth of such legal paper money simplicity__Especially with all the lies against the simple truth...?

[labelwench]

But, how does one get people to see the truth of such legal paper money simplicity__Especially with all the lies against the simple truth...?
Originally posted by Lloyd Gillespie

We are rapidly moving beyond paper money to mere pixels transferred electronically to personal accounts and then exchanged by means of electronic transaction.

I am expected to physically show up at my employment venue as scheduled, exude blood, sweat and tears, for the contracted amount of 'credits', and never even have the seductive pleasure of paper crossing my palm.

Walk in with a mere $2,000.00 in cash to put in your RRSP because it was a gift from a dying parent, and you have to fill in a form before the investor can legally transact it.

Having won two fights with the infernal revenue agency, I am playing the game as a simple wage slave, no more contributing to society through free enterprise for me, and this a supposedly democratic country.

Am I confident in this system? Happy about it? Not snapping likely!

But until I can figure out a safe direction of travel, I shall bide my time and tread water.......

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Re: Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?

All good protests must start with the solutions to the problems__As without viable solutions, all you have is more problems... T.Paine

[labelwench]

Re: Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?

All good protests must start with the solutions to the problems__As without viable solutions, all you have is more problems... T.Paine

Fair enough. I am biding my time and studying the system from within. 'Know thy enemy' and likewise 'know thy ally.'

What other suggestions might you proffer from your wider ranging experience, Lloyd, and others also?