You work to afford to buy a house. You pay off the house. You buy a better house. You bring up your kids in better conditions. Each person decides what his work/reward ratio should be. That, to me, is what capitalism boils down to. You leverage what you do have--in some cases only your youth, your energy, your labor--to acquire something which in turn will allow you to acquire something better, be it house, neighborhood, education, you name it. You pursue happiness, the outlines and quality of which you determine, and no one else.
Thanks; one additional point: capitalism is latent, in the sense that it draws on the decentralized initiative of people in the absence of strong, intentional direction. It's often a kind of compromise or default approach where those who want strong intentional, central direction, can't agree among themselves. The European countries are trying a kind of social democratic capitalism that offers some central direction, the closest we have to a sustainable alternative to capitalism in the West, but hard to see how long this will last as economic growth slows.
“Express yourself authentically” is one of the opportunities for those whose Malthusian needs are met, whether via capitalism or other system of production and distribution. Perhaps each individual’s ability to express themselves as they see fit, whether in service to self, family or community, suffices as the “purpose” that is sought by both the author and the critic. While political systems offer greater and lesser freedoms and restrictions on such expression, economic systems offer greater and lesser opportunities for individuals to meet, and surpass, their Malthusian needs. Perhaps another argument against capitalism’s continuous sucking of wealth to the wealthiest from those who struggle to meet their basic needs is the reduction In the number of individuals whose wherewithal enables each to “Express yourself authentically”,
and thereby makes us all poorer for the lack of their self-expression.
What a load of b.s., written by those who would command and control you. To start off with the socialist mantra, "I know better than you what is good for you." and suggest it's a superior system, that people who don't listen to you are leading useless lives, is arrogant and pretentious. Screw off.
You work to afford to buy a house. You pay off the house. You buy a better house. You bring up your kids in better conditions. Each person decides what his work/reward ratio should be. That, to me, is what capitalism boils down to. You leverage what you do have--in some cases only your youth, your energy, your labor--to acquire something which in turn will allow you to acquire something better, be it house, neighborhood, education, you name it. You pursue happiness, the outlines and quality of which you determine, and no one else.
Thanks; one additional point: capitalism is latent, in the sense that it draws on the decentralized initiative of people in the absence of strong, intentional direction. It's often a kind of compromise or default approach where those who want strong intentional, central direction, can't agree among themselves. The European countries are trying a kind of social democratic capitalism that offers some central direction, the closest we have to a sustainable alternative to capitalism in the West, but hard to see how long this will last as economic growth slows.
It’s just a system of production. One is free to turn it into a way of life. Or not.
“Express yourself authentically” is one of the opportunities for those whose Malthusian needs are met, whether via capitalism or other system of production and distribution. Perhaps each individual’s ability to express themselves as they see fit, whether in service to self, family or community, suffices as the “purpose” that is sought by both the author and the critic. While political systems offer greater and lesser freedoms and restrictions on such expression, economic systems offer greater and lesser opportunities for individuals to meet, and surpass, their Malthusian needs. Perhaps another argument against capitalism’s continuous sucking of wealth to the wealthiest from those who struggle to meet their basic needs is the reduction In the number of individuals whose wherewithal enables each to “Express yourself authentically”,
and thereby makes us all poorer for the lack of their self-expression.
What a load of b.s., written by those who would command and control you. To start off with the socialist mantra, "I know better than you what is good for you." and suggest it's a superior system, that people who don't listen to you are leading useless lives, is arrogant and pretentious. Screw off.
Fantastic piece. Reminds me of some of the arguments in Alex Karp’s Tech Republic
As it happens, I also reviewed that book for Commonplace! https://commonplace.substack.com/p/alex-karps-technopolitik