|
|
======================================================
CAPITALISM VS. SELF-GOVERNMENT
> This essay of yours truly shatters the libertarian myth about unrestrained > capitalism. Rand and others like her live in a fantasy land that has never > existed. They oppose collective bargaining, wage laws, overtime compensation, etc., > because it hampers capitalistic enterprise. Well, so what? Good capitalists > still make money and workers also enjoy a little better life. Unrestrained > corporate global capitalism is as dangerous as communism or fascism. All of > these "isms" are threats to human liberty. I think you are right. The purpose of government is to govern -- to regulate the relationships within society so that justice is done and the rights of the people are protected. It seems naive to assume that there is ANY part of social relationships between people that should be exempt from the need for protecting the rights of the parties involved. Capitalism uncontrolled is almost certain to be a source for the exploitation of powerless people -- something that no free society can allow. As stated in the Declaration, our society is founded on the natural rights of persons who are all equal before the law. The purpose of government is to secure those rights. > The fact that powerless people have equal rights in a democratic society is a > testament to freedom and our form of government. The objectivists seem to > think we live in some atomistic society in which all of us live unconnected > lives. That is not only impossible,but I believe greatly undesirable.They seem > to see monopoly capitalism as some sort of great earth shattering > panacea, which is benevolent. The facts prove otherwise. Monopoly capitalism can > be quite malevolent, and in some cases worse than slavery. Look at the > factories of 18th century England, were those workers free? I think not! They > were unable to vote, and when they could vote they were forced to vote what their > employers wanted. They were kept dependent on the company and had no political > power. It is all so plain and simple, isn't it? once it is seen that our natural rights exist not as the rights of isolated individuals, but as the rights of individuals WITHIN a free society of other individuals with equal rights. There will always be the powerful and the powerless, or perhaps more acurately, the more powerful and the less powerful. It is the function of a free society to protect ALL members equally. Apparently, the Objectivists are so focused on themselves that they fail to see that without everyone else, we as individuals are virtually nothing. A free society is necessarily a sharing society, and, as you say, unconnected lives are close to impossible. A less than free society is an exploitative society of wolves over sheep. Look at Russia. They have "democracy," and "capitalism," but is it truly a free society, where the rights of all members are protected equally? Not hardly. There must be rule of law, and the laws must afford equal protection.