• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Has capitalism increased hatred in the human race?

Has capitalism increased hatred in the human race?


  • Total voters
    67
Capitalism leverages the greed in humans to fuel productivity. However, greed is based on selfishness, which produces hatred of others.

As such, has the advance in capitalism resulted in an increase in hatred in the human race?

Your premise is entirely wrong. Capitalism, as the name suggests, is a method of growing capital in order produce goods and services that people need and want. The investor and producer are motivated by a two fold reason. To first produce and provide and secondly to gain a return. The premise of capitalism is production not greed.
 
It is true that no system is immune to its influence. And part of the problem with the communism, at least how I understand it, is that it thinks it can be eradicated. That said, capitalism does seek to leverage greed, and in so doing encourages its growth. Greed is experienced to various degrees, depending on how individuals cultivate it. As such, the case can be made that capitalism creates conditions such that individuals are more prone to develop and cultivate greed which increases its growth. An increase in hate is the result. On the other hand, socialist models are more based on the notion of sharing. As such, the case can be made that they have the effect of limiting greed, although not eliminating it.

Pure, unadulterated, bull****. Running a successful, for-profit business, is not synonymous with "greed". Fail.
 
No, capitalism has not increased hatred in the human race. Political agendas and $10's of millions in messaging have.

That is indeed part of it. But that is a result of capitalism.
 
That the ruthlessness of the capitalist is not only made possible by restrictions on the use of force and is so with an ameliorated form of brutality. It is also not the path of preference of the truly ruthless, who's systyle capitalism would cramp.

I want to comment, but really don't understand what you mean by the ruthlessness of the capitalist is made possible by restrictions on the use of force. Furthermore I don't understand that first statement at all. I apologize for not being able to comprehend what you mean. Could you please explain further? There is something that I am missing.
 
That is indeed part of it. But that is a result of capitalism.

No. Pick your -ism. It doesn't matter which one. Political agenda's and $10 of millions in messaging does the trick.

Communism, Socialism, it doesn't matter. Pitting one against the other, the party faithful, against the agitators, the contributors against the takers. It doesn't matter. It's about power, no matter the -ism involved, and to get in and maintain it, it's agenda and message.
 
I've no problem with a balanced system, because as it stands now capitalism under our current system is far from the economic system put in place to breed competition. It smashes it to pieces and breeds power and force.

Absolutely. But part of the problem, as you have pointed out, is that human nature is really the problem. The implementation of such an abstract system will inevitably run up against the problem of human nature. And in practical terms, there must be some sort of mechanism in place that encourages and sense of sharing and social responsibility to go along with incentives for economic development.
 
Your premise is entirely wrong. Capitalism, as the name suggests, is a method of growing capital in order produce goods and services that people need and want. The investor and producer are motivated by a two fold reason. To first produce and provide and secondly to gain a return. The premise of capitalism is production not greed.

I would argue that such production and return, in practical terms, are based on the notion of greed. It is simply a part of human nature. The question is how to create an environment such that it does not develop to the extent that it becomes destructive to human civilization.
 
Pure, unadulterated, bull****. Running a successful, for-profit business, is not synonymous with "greed". Fail.

Sorry, but an element of greed is there. Even in socialist systems the greed is there. The question is how to limit its influence such that it does not become destructive.
 
Sorry, but an element of greed is there. Even in socialist systems the greed is there. The question is how to limit its influence such that it does not become destructive.

So is there an element of greed in having a successful career? Are you a greedy bastard if you earn a lot of money?
 
Absolutely. But part of the problem, as you have pointed out, is that human nature is really the problem. The implementation of such an abstract system will inevitably run up against the problem of human nature. And in practical terms, there must be some sort of mechanism in place that encourages and sense of sharing and social responsibility to go along with incentives for economic development.

I didn't touch upon the social side of capitalism. I was mostly commenting about how our current system is anything but about competition, so the economic system has been hijacked and only the name remains.

To address the social issue, you are correct. Something else needs to be done to address this issue since capitalism produces all kinds of economic extremes from poverty to great wealth and everything in between. There is nothing wrong with placing safety nets and social programs into such a system. It is the humane thing to do.
 
No. Pick your -ism. It doesn't matter which one. Political agenda's and $10 of millions in messaging does the trick.

Communism, Socialism, it doesn't matter. Pitting one against the other, the party faithful, against the agitators, the contributors against the takers. It doesn't matter. It's about power, no matter the -ism involved, and to get in and maintain it, it's agenda and message.

I don't disagree with you on that ocean. One need only look to how Stalin had Trotsky killed to see that. But my point is that there needs to be some sort of balancing mechanism to capitalism that encourages the notion of sharing and social responsibility. Otherwise you end up with a society of humans that is filled with a destructive level of hate.
 
I want to comment, but really don't understand what you mean by the ruthlessness of the capitalist is made possible by restrictions on the use of force. Furthermore I don't understand that first statement at all. I apologize for not being able to comprehend what you mean. Could you please explain further? There is something that I am missing.

When all is said and done, what it means is that capitalism reduces the use of force and that as ruthless as the capitalist might appear from within the system, he is not really such, when compared with the truly ruthless.
 
So is there an element of greed in having a successful career? Are you a greedy bastard if you earn a lot of money?

There is an element of greed to it. I'm greedy to a certain extent. I have a job that pays me over 100k a year and I have a business so that I can have more. :lamo

What I am saying is that capitalism has a tendency to cultivate greed to the extent that it becomes destructive. Although I am greedy, I would rather go back to horses if it meant that it would save the lives of innocent people who are being killed for the sake of having oil.
 
I didn't touch upon the social side of capitalism. I was mostly commenting about how our current system is anything but about competition, so the economic system has been hijacked and only the name remains.

To address the social issue, you are correct. Something else needs to be done to address this issue since capitalism produces all kinds of economic extremes from poverty to great wealth and everything in between. There is nothing wrong with placing safety nets and social programs into such a system. It is the humane thing to do.

Well we agree with the second item. With regards to the first, what we have is what you are going to get when you try to practically implement such an abstraction as a capitalist system.
 
Last edited:
I don't disagree with you on that ocean. One need only look to how Stalin had Trotsky killed to see that. But my point is that there needs to be some sort of balancing mechanism to capitalism that encourages the notion of sharing and social responsibility. Otherwise you end up with a society of humans that is filled with a destructive level of hate.

It seems to me there is a balancing mechanism to capitalism. It's called opportunity.

I recognize there are some who comprehend what that means, and others who don't. There will those who take action, and those who don't. It's the groups who try to exploit the "don'ts" who cause the hate.

If capitalism, and I'm not referring to pure capitalism where anything goes, but capitalism in the broad modern sense, created hate among humans, people wouldn't be trying so hard to get to the United States to give their dreams a try.
 
When all is said and done, what it means is that capitalism reduces the use of force and that as ruthless as the capitalist might appear from within the system, he is not really such, when compared with the truly ruthless.

Now I understand. Sorry about not being able to keep up. How is it that you think capitalism reduces the use of force? I don't agree with that.
 
Well we agree with the second item. With regards to the first, that's what we have is what you are going to get when you try to practically implement such an abstraction as a capitalist system.

Which is why any system can be hijacked and used by the power hunger and has been for centuries.
 
It seems to me there is a balancing mechanism to capitalism. It's called opportunity.

I recognize there are some who comprehend what that means, and others who don't. There will those who take action, and those who don't. It's the groups who try to exploit the "don'ts" who cause the hate.

If capitalism, and I'm not referring to pure capitalism where anything goes, but capitalism in the broad modern sense, created hate among humans, people wouldn't be trying so hard to get to the United States to give their dreams a try.

I don't agree with you that opportunity is intrinsic to capitalism. And that is probably where we diverge. What I see is that the competitiveness of a capitalism system encourages people to create barriers to entry for others such that profit can be maximized.
 
Which is why any system can be hijacked and used by the power hunger and has been for centuries.

Absolutely. Again, the question becomes how to limit that, and if I understand you correctly, I think at the very least we both agree that a pure, laissez faire capitalist system will not do that.
 
Absolutely. Again, the question becomes how to limit that, and if I understand you correctly, I think at the very least we both agree that a pure, laissez faire capitalist system will not do that.

Bingo. You are 100% correct.
 
I don't agree with you that opportunity is intrinsic to capitalism. And that is probably where we diverge. What I see is that the competitiveness of a capitalism system encourages people to create barriers to entry for others such that profit can be maximized.

Yes, that is certainly where we diverge. I have never experienced any barriers, beyond what would be expected, in my endeavors, or among others I know who have made the same commitment to opportunity. I've certainly seen plenty of people who don't make the effort complain mightily.
 
Yes, that is certainly where we diverge. I have never experienced any barriers, beyond what would be expected, in my endeavors, or among others I know who have made the same commitment to opportunity. I've certainly seen plenty of people who don't make the effort complain mightily.

Well capitalism is about competition. And competition is, by its nature more or less brutal. For example, there is a lady that is posing an obstruction to me for expanding my business. I am watching her with great care because as soon as she makes a mistake I am going to muscle her out, what we used to call bowguard (meaning the use of the elbow to remove an obstruction), so that I can expand. Yes, I want to put up an obstruction for her. I don't want her to have the opportunity to obstruct me the way she is doing it. I really don't see how anyone can make it in business if they don't have that type of mentality. I look around me, and that is what I see going on in business. People try to put down the competition. That's just the way it is. That is the result of greed and I know for a fact I am not the only one like that. Even at my job at a very large company, we don't go to the competition and say, look we are going to create opportunities for you. If we do it at all, it is to further our own agenda.

For me personally, the only way to get out of all of that, would be to go and live in a monastery or something.
 
Well capitalism is about competition. And competition is, by its nature more or less brutal. For example, there is a lady that is posing an obstruction to me for expanding my business. I am watching her with great care because as soon as she makes a mistake I am going to muscle her out, what we used to call bowguard (meaning the use of the elbow to remove an obstruction), so that I can expand. Yes, I want to put up an obstruction for her. I don't want her to have the opportunity to obstruct me the way she is doing it. I really don't see how anyone can make it in business if they don't have that type of mentality. I look around me, and that is what I see going on in business. People try to put down the competition. That's just the way it is. That is the result of greed and I know for a fact I am not the only one like that. Even at my job at a very large company, we don't go to the competition and say, look we are going to create opportunities for you. If we do it at all, it is to further our own agenda.

For me personally, the only way to get out of all of that, would be to go and live in a monastery or something.

Well, you have an interesting take on business and competition. I have never approached opportunity with the mindset you're describing. Market share can be achieved many different ways. Either you offer the same thing for less, a better thing for the same price, better for more and can justify it, or you meet a need that is not being met, and charge according to what the market is willing to pay.

"Elbowing out the competition" isn't a negative thing, it's how innovation or improvement is accomplished. A business that doesn't adopt and improve is bound to fail. That's not a negative result of capitalism, but a negative result of poor management.
 
For those not familiar with "bowguarding", here's what I'm talking about.



That's what we used to call "bowguarding."
 
Back
Top Bottom