Capitalism as a meta emergent force seeks to commodify everything in order to make the max profit possible. It has done this from basic consumer goods to all of the entertainment industries. It has also done this to religions in the west (Christianity, Judaism, several strands of Neopaganism, any parts of integrated Islam and so on and so on).
The fact of the matter is a lot of us feel completely aliennated from religion in the west and seek alternatives or just become athiests/agnostics, why is this beyond the consumption of information? I believe a factor that plays into this is the fact that Capitalism will effectively streamline the spirituality and deeper meanings/symbolism out of religions slowly. Compare the religions in the west to those of the Middle east (Christian middle eastern groups, foreign islam and jewish sects) and Asia (Hinuism and Buddhism) and the effects of capital are dramatically less present there. The religions there have much more of a focus on the etheral and the bonding of the community, feelings that can't be described by language. Being instead of consuming basically.
So, in this sense, capitalism and spirituality do not go together.
>a system of economics that lacks state intervention >a system of economics which adopts a state to persist Which one is it, brainlet?
David Sullivan
Those are clearly two different anons you are talking to, retard.
Owen Foster
>what is state capitalism but i agree, abortion should only be legal for blacks
Jace Harris
unqualified devotion to profit and efficiency is religious behavior
Aaron Campbell
>Capitalism adopts the state apparatus to persist. if anything, it's the other way around, cleetus.
Nicholas Anderson
>the ethereal and the bonding of the community >feelings that can't be described by language Then you have failed.
Isaiah Brooks
>clearly >on an anonymous forum Yep, clearly. Doesn’t affect my point that a state will always fight to preserve the status quo, no matter the economic context, anyway.
Cameron Barnes
I'm Christian and ambivalent towards capitalism, it has some good and some bad. Definitely the idea of a "free market" fixing everything is retarded, but so is the idea that centrally planning everything will workout.
Economics should be treated as a joke and something we have to engage in to sustain our livelihoods but it shouldn't turn into an overarching ideology like Communism or Free-market Libertardianism
Andrew Reyes
>he can't differentiate between obviously two different people and a samefag Maybe Reddit is more your speed. >Doesn’t affect my point that a state will always fight to preserve the status quo, no matter the economic context, anyway. The state does not have capitalism as it's vested interest, because capitalism is without a state, by definition. So your "point" is irrelevant.
Ian Ward
Op here
>I'm Christian and ambivalent towards capitalism
Alright, your religion is being streamlined in terms of the spiritual experience it offers for profit. There are many protestant sects that are only in it for the money and dillute connecting to God. There is also the fact the medium is used by outright oppurtunists like Peter Popoff.
>Definitely the idea of a "free market" fixing everything is retarded,
The neoliberal free market as you know it is the kinda thing it always grows overtime.
>Economics should be treated as a joke and something we have to engage in to sustain our livelihoods but it shouldn't turn into an overarching ideology like Communism or Free-market Libertardianism
Those ideologies dictate the material conditions of people tho
Jack Walker
You realized that now?
Jacob Jenkins
>America didn’t spend billions of dollars on proxy wars attempting to stop the spread of communism in order to protect capitalists interests Have you been living in an alternate timeline for the last 70 years?
Carter Ramirez
They could have just destroyed the Soviets at the end of ww2
No one references the invisible hand anymore because it's been sufficiently refuted. The only time it may have been true is in 18th century agrarian based societies.
Tyler Collins
No I realized it a long time ago I just posted it here to see how people would reply.
Lucas Nguyen
then why do people still defend the free market in our post industrial economy smartypants?
Blake Stewart
>capitalism is without a state, by definition you acoustic children and your semantic distinctions you know what the fuck he means, you're just being pedantic and acting like it's a rebuttal. do we really have to spend 30 replies distinguishing between "pure" capitalism and the mixed economies that actually exist in our world?
Charles Sullivan
Because the invisible hand isn't the only aspect of the free market and there have been more developments in economics since Adam Smith you brainlet.
Austin Jenkins
Why didn’t they?
Austin Miller
>Economics should be treated as a joke. Economics is everything. You can do nothing if you do not have the resources/funding >America didn’t spend billions of dollars on proxy wars attempting to stop the spread of communism in order to protect capitalists interests America's economic system could barely be called "capitalism"; it's a misnomer. It most certainly isn't free market. >wojak image >"smartypants" Class 4 brainlet in the thread. >you know what the fuck he means, you're just being pedantic and acting like it's a rebuttal. Well, I can't rebut a non-argument. >do we really have to spend 30 replies distinguishing between "pure" capitalism and the mixed economies that actually exist in our world? When dealing with retards; yes, you have to reiterate.
Sebastian Lee
Smith did not write about The Invisible Hand in the way that most people today use the term. In reality, all Smith meant by it was that, given fewer restrictions on the use of capital (less protectionism), merchants and manufacturers would still - because of their patriotism - choose to invest in their home countries rather than markets abroad, thus preserving the economic health of the mother country through a sort of "home bias." That's a pretty tame concept, and it certainly has nothing to do with The Cato Institute, Atlas Shrugged, or neoclassical economics - the ideology that attends capitalism.
Well that obviously shouldn't be taken seriously nowadays in the age of globalization where most businesses are perfectly fine outsourcing manufacturing.
Kayden Rivera
Honestly employer-employee relations violate Kant's second categorical imperative. Engaging in "mutually beneficial exchanges" is still mutually using each other and not treating people as proper ends in themselves.
Owen Richardson
Sure, but the real point here is this: Smith did not give intellectual credibility to the idea that a free market will automatically optimize price-setting, production, or the allocation of capital. He never wrote about such a concept, and never applied anything remotely like this thesis to a market. That is entirely a confabulation of neoclassical economics.
Kevin Diaz
So many words to say so little. OP and everyone in this thread is obviously arguing about the current iteration of capitalism that persists in modern Western democracies. Why even complicate the argument with this ridiculous pedantry? We aren’t arguing about ‘pure capitalism’ (a term as vacuous as ‘pure communism’ or ‘pure ’) so why waste so much breath crying vainly about it?
Camden Hughes
Would you say that a truly functional communist society is more fitting with Kant’s cat. imperative, as it presses the idea of duty and respect for others as ends, rather than means?
Connor Watson
lmfao
Charles Lee
Acting on duty is a very internal matter. If you only act to redistribute your wealth because of a threat of violence and not because a respect for moral law, then you are not acting from duty. It's very unlikely that a state could compel you to be moral. The Kantian ideal would be a libertarian socialist arrangement based on voluntary participation.
Wyatt Wood
capitalism doesn't go with anything that's what makes it powerful
Noah Rodriguez
That’s a good way to look at it, thanks user.
Jose Jones
tl;dr LMAO
Andrew Watson
He also used the phrase "invisible hand" when explaining that if one person owned all the land and could apply any rent they wanted, they would choose instead to redistribute the land out of concern for the common good. Any idea that Adam Smith is some Rand-esque figure is highly ignorant. He also argued for capitalism on the basis that it would lead to equality of outcome if labor were allowed to switch freely between jobs (because any labor shortage would cause a raise in wages, and when that labor shortage was filled wages would drop, and this game would play out until there's no reason to change jobs - i.e. all wages are equal)
Adrian Campbell
Vote for Chris Rockman for U.S. president
Aaron Price
I'll take a medium rare hamburger, curly fries, an oreo milk shake, and some capitalistic freedom on the side.
Tyler Parker
capitalism = materialism, so no it doesn't get along with spirituallity
Carson Baker
Is there an ideal christian mode of production?
Wyatt Kelly
No, you faggots don't get it. Judaism had it right all along. The money is the God and using money is a deeply spiritual experience. Christian, Buddhism, and so on are hilarious simculurums over the undeniable Judaistic realism for morons who can't handle the hyperrealism of the reality.
