Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Specific governments have committed atrocities, but the existence of government doesn't demand the commission of atrocities. The problem with OP's logic is that he assumes that because SOME governments have committed atrocities, it follows that ALL governments will commit atrocities. Even if every government in the history of the world was responsible for atrocities, it doesn't automatically follow that every future government will be the same.
The way I see it, government is a tool for the shaping of a society, nothing more. Not every government is different and not every society is the same. Not every politician or leader has had the same motivations, the same outlook, or the same desires for the people. People who believe in government believe that if we can happen upon the right 'formula', then the government can be an effective tool for shaping a peaceful and harmonious society.
'Big business' on the other hand only exists to make money. There is no other function that these businesses are even capable of as far as I know. I'm assuming you don't mean state-owned businesses or non-profits here. Big business is always looking for ways to profit-- including worker exploitation, downsizing, corner-cutting, etc. No matter how often they fall back on 'the government forced my hand by raising taxes' or 'the economy is bad because of this or that president', THEY are always directly responsible for their actions and their actions are always in the interests of their shareholders/bottom line. If they were capable of taking an active interest in their employees' welfare instead of merely trying to attract the best talent, then they would find a way to keep people working. But they will only offer what they can get away with offering... and if they could get away with offering a lot less, they would.
Big businesses DO have a hand in wars and have historically played a large role in genocides and atrocities as well. Strip away all of the propaganda, and a lot of wars (especially in early imperialist capitalism) were not much more than land grabs designed to line the pockets of the elites and bolster the economies of Western European nations. And don't tell me slavery was an ideological phenomenon either--it was pure economic exploitation. The Scramble for Africa wasn't ideological-- the idea of 'civilizing the brutes' was merely an excuse for business interests to feel good about stealing their resources. Leopold of Belgium is a perfect example of capitalist genocide in the name of profit.
The German economy under the Nazis was boosted by the Holocaust, which was essentially a slave labor economy. The Nazi-friendly German corporations profited from the extremely cheap labor in much the same the way American companies profit from cheap labor in other countries. Maybe the people in China aren't being executed or starving to death, but you can't say that their working conditions aren't taking an adverse toll on their health.
tl;dr: government in its purest form is a tool for shaping society, big business in its purest form is a tool for lining the pockets of the business-owners-- that's why.
Specific governments have committed atrocities, but the existence of government doesn't demand the commission of atrocities. The problem with OP's logic is that he assumes that because SOME governments have committed atrocities, it follows that ALL governments will commit atrocities. Even if every government in the history of the world was responsible for atrocities, it doesn't automatically follow that every future government will be the same.
The way I see it, government is a tool for the shaping of a society, nothing more. Not every government is different and not every society is the same. Not every politician or leader has had the same motivations, the same outlook, or the same desires for the people. People who believe in government believe that if we can happen upon the right 'formula', then the government can be an effective tool for shaping a peaceful and harmonious society.
'Big business' on the other hand only exists to make money. There is no other function that these businesses are even capable of as far as I know. I'm assuming you don't mean state-owned businesses or non-profits here. Big business is always looking for ways to profit-- including worker exploitation, downsizing, corner-cutting, etc. No matter how often they fall back on 'the government forced my hand by raising taxes' or 'the economy is bad because of this or that president', THEY are always directly responsible for their actions and their actions are always in the interests of their shareholders/bottom line. If they were capable of taking an active interest in their employees' welfare instead of merely trying to attract the best talent, then they would find a way to keep people working. But they will only offer what they can get away with offering... and if they could get away with offering a lot less, they would.
Big businesses DO have a hand in wars and have historically played a large role in genocides and atrocities as well. Strip away all of the propaganda, and a lot of wars (especially in early imperialist capitalism) were not much more than land grabs designed to line the pockets of the elites and bolster the economies of Western European nations. And don't tell me slavery was an ideological phenomenon either--it was pure economic exploitation. The Scramble for Africa wasn't ideological-- the idea of 'civilizing the brutes' was merely an excuse for business interests to feel good about stealing their resources. Leopold of Belgium is a perfect example of capitalist genocide in the name of profit.
The German economy under the Nazis was boosted by the Holocaust, which was essentially a slave labor economy. The Nazi-friendly German corporations profited from the extremely cheap labor in much the same the way American companies profit from cheap labor in other countries. Maybe the people in China aren't being executed or starving to death, but you can't say that their working conditions aren't taking an adverse toll on their health.
tl;dr: government in its purest form is a tool for shaping society, big business in its purest form is a tool for lining the pockets of the business-owners-- that's why.
"Specific governments have committed atrocities, but the existence of government doesn't demand the commission of atrocities. The problem with OP's logic is that he assumes that because SOME governments have committed atrocities, it follows that ALL governments will commit atrocities. Even if every government in the history of the world was responsible for atrocities, it doesn't automatically follow that every future government will be the same. "
Then you say,"'Big business' on the other hand only exists to make money. There is no other function that these businesses are even capable of as far as I know."
Take your first quote and replace government with "big Business" and you same argument can be made.
lets' see:
"Specific big businesses have committed atrocities, but the existence of big business doesn't demand the commission of atrocities. The problem with OP's logic is that he assumes that because SOME businesses have committed atrocities, it follows that ALL businesses will commit atrocities. Even if every business in the history of the world was responsible for atrocities, it doesn't automatically follow that every future businesses will be the same. "
You make excuses for governments then lump ALL big businesses together.
There are good an bad governments just as there are good and bad businesses.
"Big business' on the other hand only exists to make money. There is no other function that these businesses are even capable of as far as I know."
Big business ALSO creates millions of JOBS, creates an economy, etc.
MANY businesses products provide needed services and goods that people need.
Do they make money? Only if they are successful. And why shouldn't they?
When they DON'T make money they go OUT of business and all those jobs are gone. the services they USED to provide will NOT get done until another business can come along and replace them.
All those goods WON'T be made until ANOTHER business come along and satrs to make them.
It takes a LOT of time and money to "create" a successful business.
To some up, your "Opinion", "as far as I know", tells me you DON'T know much about business and the importance it serves in the grand scheme of things in our country.,
So, I will ask YOU a question. How MANY successful businesses have you created?
"Specific big businesses have committed atrocities, but the existence of big business doesn't demand the commission of atrocities. The problem with OP's logic is that he assumes that because SOME businesses have committed atrocities, it follows that ALL businesses will commit atrocities. Even if every business in the history of the world was responsible for atrocities, it doesn't automatically follow that every future businesses will be the same. "
I didn't say that businesses exist to commit atrocities, I said that they exist to make profit. Obviously some businesses are capable of turning a profit without committing atrocities. I really didn't think that this needed to be said.
OP's post seemed to suggest thar ALL governments were bad because governments have committed atrocities in the past, so I pointed out that many of those atrocities have been committed to further the interests of big business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
You make excuses for governments then lump ALL big businesses together.
So big businesses exist for reasons other than making a profit?
Really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
There are good an bad governments just as there are good and bad businesses.
I didn't say there weren't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
Big business ALSO creates millions of JOBS, creates an economy, etc.
MANY businesses products provide needed services and goods that people need.
Do they make money? Only if they are successful. And why shouldn't they?
Job creation isn't the function of business, it's merely a byproduct. If the business doesn't NEED to create the job in order to turn a profit, the job won't be created. If the business can make a bigger profit by killing a job, then the job will be killed.
And the reason big business 'creates' the economy is because the government has given private interests the plum production roles. There's nothing inherently noble or selfless about taking resources and converting them into products to be sold for money. We don't owe big business our gratitude simply because it's giving us what we think we want. It has also given us horrible diets, mindless entertainment, pollution, distraction, loud noises, an elevated sense of entitlement and Donald Trump. Just because we're familiar with these things doesn't make them good for us, good for the planet, or worth fighting for.
BTW Soviet Russia's unemployment rate was 1-2% throughout its run. When was the last time the US could say the same? I'm not defending that system but if all you care about is having a job, then you might want to become a Stalinist.
The bottom line is that I know for a fact that big business doesn't give a **** about me, so why should I worship at its feet like you do? I don't support this government either, but dismissing the entire CONCEPT of government is a huge overreaction-- the product of frustration and desire for simple, black and white solutions that don't translate well into reality. I have more faith in the prospect of an enlightened government than in a business that will give everyone jobs and happiness out of the goodness of its heart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
When they DON'T make money they go OUT of business and all those jobs are gone. the services they USED to provide will NOT get done until another business can come along and replace them.
All those goods WON'T be made until ANOTHER business come along and satrs to make them.
It takes a LOT of time and money to "create" a successful business.
To some up, your "Opinion", "as far as I know", tells me you DON'T know much about business and the importance it serves in the grand scheme of things in our country.,
Well, I guess that no one's ever going to say that you don't know as much about business as a fifth grader.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
So, I will ask YOU a question. How MANY successful businesses have you created?
So I'm not allowed to have an opinion on the matter until I've created a successful business?
Or is that supposed to be some sort of lame personal attack?
What I'm saying makes a lot more sense than what you're saying.
But it's still people at the heart of the issue. Greed, envy, and power-lust are human constructs.
How would society past or present work without putting people in charge? People can cause great tragedies and great triumphants.
Would you want some cold, calculating super AI to become our ruler instead?
"If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one."
There actually is an idea out there to have a supercomputer "run" society, but I definitely don't support that. At the heart of government, the purpose is to control people by force. If you're government, your job is easiest when your subjects act like robots and do as they're told.
As Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground." They may not be intentionally trying to take away people's freedom and choice, but it's natural for the government to do what it can to gain more control over time, because that's their job. People have consciousness and free will, and overruling their decisions in life is very dehumanizing.
If there's a big house with 10 adults living in it, would they need to choose one or two of themselves to be "in charge" of the others? I don't mean being a leader, or being looked to to make decisions, because that isn't government. I mean that they have permission to take your money to spend on things the house needs, whether you agree or not, and they have permission to lock you in the basement if you don't comply with their orders. They're also the final decider of what "the rules" are, and if you disobey any of their arbitrary rules they will come to your room with a gun, threaten to take your stuff, demand money, try to lock you in the basement, and kill you if you try to fight back.
Or, can they "self-govern" and come up with house rules without anyone having power over the rest? There will be conflicts within the house, but can they be resolved without locking people in the basement, threatening violence against them for not following orders, or taking their money by force? I say yes, and people do it all the time.
I didn't say that businesses exist to commit atrocities, I said that they exist to make profit. Obviously some businesses are capable of turning a profit without committing atrocities. I really didn't think that this needed to be said.
OP's post seemed to suggest thar ALL governments were bad because governments have committed atrocities in the past, so I pointed out that many of those atrocities have been committed to further the interests of big business.
So big businesses exist for reasons other than making a profit?
Really?
I didn't say there weren't.
Job creation isn't the function of business, it's merely a byproduct. If the business doesn't NEED to create the job in order to turn a profit, the job won't be created. If the business can make a bigger profit by killing a job, then the job will be killed.
And the reason big business 'creates' the economy is because the government has given private interests the plum production roles. There's nothing inherently noble or selfless about taking resources and converting them into products to be sold for money. We don't owe big business our gratitude simply because it's giving us what we think we want. It has also given us horrible diets, mindless entertainment, pollution, distraction, loud noises, an elevated sense of entitlement and Donald Trump. Just because we're familiar with these things doesn't make them good for us, good for the planet, or worth fighting for.
BTW Soviet Russia's unemployment rate was 1-2% throughout its run. When was the last time the US could say the same? I'm not defending that system but if all you care about is having a job, then you might want to become a Stalinist.
The bottom line is that I know for a fact that big business doesn't give a **** about me, so why should I worship at its feet like you do? I don't support this government either, but dismissing the entire CONCEPT of government is a huge overreaction-- the product of frustration and desire for simple, black and white solutions that don't translate well into reality. I have more faith in the prospect of an enlightened government than in a business that will give everyone jobs and happiness out of the goodness of its heart.
Well, I guess that no one's ever going to say that you don't know as much about business as a fifth grader.
So I'm not allowed to have an opinion on the matter until I've created a successful business?
Or is that supposed to be some sort of lame personal attack?
What I'm saying makes a lot more sense than what you're saying.
"What I'm saying makes a lot more sense than what you're saying."
Can we stick to the united States please. Business if left unchecked will do horrible things and gov if left unchecked will do horrible things. Checks and balances are why capitalism works (somewhat) . I hear people on the right talk about how gov should move out of the way of business. Well..... What if YOUR life savings vanished because your bank went out of business before you could make a run.? I bet you would be crying for a bailout. What if your fav business decided it was cheaper to put some lead in your food or sawdust in your cereal to max profits? I bet you would be running to the gov for help then. Everything needs a balance. Remove the checks and balances and you have children and women burning to death in a locked factory in the city. Study history folks....... Don't get your civics lessons from fox news and rush Limbeck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AfriqueNY
Look..... We have examples of what zero entitlements look like... Somalia..... Lol... Afghanistan. Former Soviet bloc. The masses must be pacified or you have war and strife . think it can't happen here???? See what happens if the businesses all pack up and move to India or Mexico..... What's stopping them from making a slow Exodus. You think poor starving people will be passive? They will come root you out of your mcmansion and your 2nd amendment won't help you. Pick up a history book and read about Europe.
You do realize that none of those are capitalist societies right? The reason there are poor and starving people is a lack of wealth in society. Capitalism has created the most wealth throughout history. Zero entitlements in the Soviet bloc? Their entire society was communist, and it collapsed. It isn't sustainable. (I know you don't support communism, btw)
I assume you won't read this, and it's a long article, but it addresses a lot of what you said here. If you want to respond to me, I'd ask that you read this first. You can skip down to the line where he asks if capitalism requires government.
Specific governments have committed atrocities, but the existence of government doesn't demand the commission of atrocities. The problem with OP's logic is that he assumes that because SOME governments have committed atrocities, it follows that ALL governments will commit atrocities. Even if every government in the history of the world was responsible for atrocities, it doesn't automatically follow that every future government will be the same.
The way I see it, government is a tool for the shaping of a society, nothing more. Not every government is different and not every society is the same. Not every politician or leader has had the same motivations, the same outlook, or the same desires for the people. People who believe in government believe that if we can happen upon the right 'formula', then the government can be an effective tool for shaping a peaceful and harmonious society.
That is what I see as so insane (not to be too offensive )...people have been trying this for thousands of years, using the same fundamental idea - that we need just the right arrangement or amount of violent domination to make society what it should be. Introducing violence into non-violent situations is exactly what PREVENTS a peaceful and harmonious society, and that's the only thing people want the government for in the first place. Use force to make people do as I want them to do.
If you notice, society has become more "civilized" throughout history, as power becomes more decentralized. When more people have a say over their own life, and less control over others, it leads to more peaceful coexistence.
Quote:
'Big business' on the other hand only exists to make money. There is no other function that these businesses are even capable of as far as I know. I'm assuming you don't mean state-owned businesses or non-profits here. Big business is always looking for ways to profit-- including worker exploitation, downsizing, corner-cutting, etc. No matter how often they fall back on 'the government forced my hand by raising taxes' or 'the economy is bad because of this or that president', THEY are always directly responsible for their actions and their actions are always in the interests of their shareholders/bottom line. If they were capable of taking an active interest in their employees' welfare instead of merely trying to attract the best talent, then they would find a way to keep people working. But they will only offer what they can get away with offering... and if they could get away with offering a lot less, they would.
Big businesses DO have a hand in wars and have historically played a large role in genocides and atrocities as well. Strip away all of the propaganda, and a lot of wars (especially in early imperialist capitalism) were not much more than land grabs designed to line the pockets of the elites and bolster the economies of Western European nations. And don't tell me slavery was an ideological phenomenon either--it was pure economic exploitation. The Scramble for Africa wasn't ideological-- the idea of 'civilizing the brutes' was merely an excuse for business interests to feel good about stealing their resources. Leopold of Belgium is a perfect example of capitalist genocide in the name of profit.
The German economy under the Nazis was boosted by the Holocaust, which was essentially a slave labor economy. The Nazi-friendly German corporations profited from the extremely cheap labor in much the same the way American companies profit from cheap labor in other countries. Maybe the people in China aren't being executed or starving to death, but you can't say that their working conditions aren't taking an adverse toll on their health.
tl;dr: government in its purest form is a tool for shaping society, big business in its purest form is a tool for lining the pockets of the business-owners-- that's why.
Your examples here are of business using government power for their benefit, and vice versa. It's like blaming the sport of boxing if one boxer takes a gun and shoots the other. The government is the gun that business can grab to get an unfair advantage over others.
Why do liberals trust the notion of government more than big business?
given that business or commerce predates organized governance by thousands of years, and even apes are capable of basic barter, I'd wager any intelligent person would be inclined to uphold the supremacy of government over commerce i.e. ''trust the notion of government more than big business'', regardless of their political background.
You do realize successfully managing a first-world country constitutes a far greater achievement than successfully running a business, RIGHT?
Or are you so sycophantic as to not realize this ?
In reality, I think your title is just poorly phrased.
How many genocides has big business committed?
How many concentration camps or gulags has big business made?
How many people has big business imprisoned over thier views?
How many nations has big business invaded?
Wake up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why do liberals trust the notion of government more than big business?
)...people have been trying this for thousands of years, using the same fundamental idea - that we need just the right arrangement or amount of violent domination to make society what it should be. Introducing violence into non-violent situations is exactly what PREVENTS a peaceful and harmonious society, and that's the only thing people want the government for in the first place. Use force to make people do as I want them to do.
