Paul V. Azzopardi

Capitalism and Freedom: Rethinking the Political and Economic System

America is not a democracy, you say, and now not even a republic. OK, you win, I am really confused now. All the four systems I mentioned share some of the characteristics I listed but in a capitalistic system there is a greater emphasis on individual rights and freedoms. Good quote from Rogers.


On Mar 21 11:40 PM mikesa69 wrote:

> Wow. Your article is neither factually accurate nor overtly manipulative,
> so the only logical conclusion I can reach is that you've chosen
> a topic that you're utterly confused about. What's more, you've done
> so while purporting to be an expert (based on the forum and the fact
> that your work was published here, it carries the implied guise of
> expertise).
>
> First off, your list of capitalist traits includes democracy, but
> true democracies always end in mob rule, which leads to oligarchy.
> Which is government ownership and control. Which is NOT capitalism.
> America is NOT a democracy and never was intended to be one. We have
> a republic. At least we used to at one time.
>
> Then you go and include wealth distribution on your list of capatilistic
> qualities! Now I must ask the question user 380426 alluded to...
> what have you been smoking?? Wealth distribution is a basic tenet
> of socialism my Canadian friend, which is the antithesis to private
> ownership and capitalism.
>
> Also, feudalism, communism and fascism do NOT have much in common
> with true capitalism. The basic definitions are polar opposites.
> The socialistic systems can all be recognized by their high levels
> of government ownership, with various levels of government control
> left as the remaining distinguishing factor between each of them.
> Capitalism promotes the exact opposite; private and secure ownership
> in both business and personal property. And to think I had such high
> hopes for your article based on the title.... Oh well.
>
> I'll leave you with a quote that might help enlighten you:
>
> The late Dr. Adrian Rogers (1931-2005) offered the following observation
> several years ago and it bears poignant significance today: "You
> cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the rich out
> of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another
> person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give
> to anybody anything the government does not first take from somebody
> else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have
> to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and
> when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because
> somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend
> is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply the wealth by
> dividing it."