Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Sunday, September 19. 2010

I found it - Capitalism and the human soul

I found the whole of Peter Saunder's 2008 essay, Why Capitalism is Good for the Soul. 


It's a classic. The key quote:



Capitalism offers no grand vision of the future, for in an open market system the future is shaped not by the imposition of utopian blueprints, but by billions of people pursuing their own preferences.



Yep. Under control systems, people are forced to pursue the preferences of their supposed betters. I do not believe in "betters."

Posted by Bird Dog in Politics at 14:49 | Comments (5) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Socialists, to me, come across as would-be aristocrats, that is, as people who desire a guaranteed place in society.

And they project this desire onto everybody, in a benign way suggesting that the common people would rather live at a guaranteed level of prosperity, if only they knew better, and in a malign way saying that the entrepreneurs among us want to lord it over the common people and have laws rigged so that they stay rich forever.
#1 John on 2010-09-19 15:40 (Reply)
Thanks for linking to Peter Saunders' essay. By chance, I already have Tom Sowell, Steven Pinker and Daniel Boorstin open on my desk to variations on the theme of "The Quest for Cosmic Justice," so one more excellent piece fits right in.

The present administration, whether Michelle's efforts to rearrange what everyone eats, or her husbands efforts to rearrange the rest of society send one back to the sources. And now there's Frank Dikotter's new book on Mao's Great Famine. They never learn. This time it will be different, right?
#2 The Elephant's Child (Link) on 2010-09-19 19:32 (Reply)
It's quite simple, capitalism IS freedom!!
Free to do as you choose and free to exchange your economic abilities as you chose.
Why anti-capitalists are allowed to define capitalism is beyond me.
WHY do anti-capitalists hate freedom?
#3 Rick on 2010-09-20 02:38 (Reply)
I've read a number of articles about choice of terms and how the choice of terms can shape debate. Relevant point here: let's use the term "free enterprise" in place of "capitalism". I'm not sure who first used the term "capitalism" but I know it got co-opted by free enterprise's worst enemies and turned into a pejorative.
When people are free to transact as they think best, we get the most effective allocations of resources that's feasible and we get the greatest material good for the vast majority of participants. This isn't speculation; every poor nation on earth is a dictatorship with central control of economic resources. A plutocracy of the wealthy is as bad as a socialist nightmare.
The US has many wealthy people who do wield considerable power but we are no plutocracy. And people can become wealthy and powerful from humble roots by providing value. Yes, they'll have to work hard and innovate and be quick -- but it all comes to value.
#4 Geoff Brown on 2010-09-20 11:43 (Reply)
I like a dash or two of betters in a Manhattan.
#5 arcs on 2010-09-20 13:51 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.