I didn’t want to direct this question to Americans specifically because, at this point, other countries have shown support to Israel in one or the other way. If my country was financing this, I would be taking the streets. Shit, I’m right now in the hospital but all I can think about is protesting anyway just to feel I did something to stop this madness.
Are you doing something about this? Are you feeling unsettled? How do you feel about all this mess?
EDIT: So, buying Chinese stuff takes the USS Gerald Ford to Gaza’s coast. Also, TIL that that chocolate my cousin gave me when she was 20 and I was 5, (delicious stuff!) made me a slavist-ish. The fact remains, this genocide is being paid and supported by taxpayers money; of course, I was hoping that most of us didn’t pay taxes wishing for this. Thank you all for your responses, some of them were hard to swallow.
Actually no. Capitalism is based on free markets and slaves aren’t involved in the market freely. If the market includes people in chains who haven’t consented to be involved, it’s not a free market.
Actually, no, different people use the word “capitalism” to mean different and sometimes incompatible things.
But only right-libertarians use it to mean “a free market in which all people’s individual rights are always respected”; which is why when right-libertarians say something about “capitalism” absolutely everyone else gets weirded out.
For a contrary example, in my usage, “capitalism” emphasizes the role of finance capital (roughly: shareholders) in choosing which economic activities will get funding; and secondarily the tendency of governments to support established financial interests. “Capitalism” in this sense didn’t exist prior to the development of privately financed colonial projects; it was the difference between Spanish colonialism (funded by the monarchy; see e.g. Columbus) and Dutch and English colonialism (funded by private investors through state-created corporations; see the various East and West India Companies).
In my view, many people say “capitalism” where they really mean something like “scarcity” or “greed” or “status competition”, all of which existed long before historical capitalism. Merchants have jacked up prices in response to scarcity long before there were capital markets; and people in many historical non-capitalist societies still competed on the basis of wealth and prosperity.
Well wikipedia also defines it based on free markets.
If you don’t think that’s a valid definition of capitalism you ought to argue your point over there.
You can mean whatever you want when you say capitalism. I use the definition where free markets are a characteristic.
There really was a major change in trade and fortune with the advent of capital investment at a particular point in history, beginning in northern Europe and especially in the investment markets of Amsterdam and London. This is what a lot of people mean by “capitalism”, and if you want to understand the things they say, it will help you if you don’t pretend they mean something else.
If I had to name one defining property of “capitalism”, it would be that an investor can trade shares in a venture managed by someone else, without thereby taking on either management responsibility or financial liability for the downsides of that venture. This was the financial innovation that made Northern European colonialism possible, and it is maintained to the present day in the form of stock markets.
Capital-ism is about making capital (money from investors) available to ventures (businesses; startups; colonial voyages). It doesn’t necessarily mean free speech or even free trade. It means freedom for capital, not necessarily for you.
Tell me you know nothing about economics without saying, “I know nothing of economics”.
But… the invisible hand…!
What is this “invisible hand” thing people keep referring to?
deleted by creator