mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (04/12/84)
====================
The nice thing about capitalism is that it works better than any other system
that has been tried. Socialism assumes that all the people will agree on
goals -- things that are "good" -- and work together towards those goals.
The idea is attractive because people tend to assume that it will be *their*
goals that will be adopted. But if people disagree with the "common good,"
socialism requires that they be forced to conform. (Surely they cannot be
permitted to go off on their own, working as they choose, trading with whom
they please, keeping the profits from their work and investment -- for that
would be capitalism.)
Capitalism, on the other hand, *permits* people to work towards common goals
if they so choose, but does not require it. You are free to work towards
what you see as "good," just as I am free to do the same. Such a system is
much more compatible with individual liberty, and therefore to be preferred.
Scott Renner
====================
This hits the nail on the head. Good ideas thrive in a pluralistic
environment. But why, oh why does this rhetoric work for individuals
within the USofA and not in the relations between the "capitalist"
US Administration and other countries that would like to be its friends?
Can't we "be permitted to go off on our own, working as we choose, trading
with whom we please, keeping the profits from our own work or investment"
-- wouldn't that be capitalism?
--
Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt