5 ms·

Capitalism is an emergent phenomenon. It is not “instituted” or enforced by any party or organization, though its practice may be supported or suppressed by the

by pgayed 6y ago

Capitalism is an emergent phenomenon. It is not “instituted” or enforced by any party or organization, though its practice may be supported or suppressed by them. It is the naturalᵃ consequence of private exchange. So long as two, consenting parties—who are never symmetrically informed—engage in nonbroadcast (“private”) transactions, you have capitalism. __________ ᵃ By “natural” I only mean determined.

pmiller2 6y ago
Capitalism needs a puissant state to enforce property rights, at the very minimum. Without private property, you don't have capitalism. However, small scale barter is not the problem. Capitalism at scale is the problem, and that can certainly be torn down ("suppressed," in your terms). As for private exchange, let's just not have private property, shall we?
- pgayed 6y ago
  You don’t need a state to enforce property rights. Humans do that all their own. Humans defend—and invade—land they wish to occupy. If such notions as private property emerge, I reckon it’s because the benefits of the idea are greater than the blood costs of defense. It’s wishful thinking descendants of families who died over, negotiated, settled and established a history in a particular terrain—no matter how unfairly acquired—will relinquish it without force. What makes the family homestead valuable are the costs incurred to keep it.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    Then what prevents me from coming and making a "private exchange" of your life for your stuff? I dig a deep hole somewhere. I incurred significant costs to do so. Is that hole now valuable?
    - pgayed 6y ago
      > a "private exchange" of your life for your stuff? What stops you from attempting that now? Consequences. You're assuming you would not also be putting your life at risk attempting to do so? (I'm not talking about state enforcement or punishment. We are all free to protect ourselves.) As for your "deep hole", note I said the homestead is valuable because of the costs incurred to _keep_ it.

by pgayed 6y ago

pmiller2 6y ago

Capitalism needs a puissant state to enforce property rights, at the very minimum. Without private property, you don't have capitalism. However, small scale barter is not the problem. Capitalism at scale is the problem, and that can certainly be torn down ("suppressed," in your terms). As for private exchange, let's just not have private property, shall we?

pgayed 6y ago
You don’t need a state to enforce property rights. Humans do that all their own. Humans defend—and invade—land they wish to occupy. If such notions as private property emerge, I reckon it’s because the benefits of the idea are greater than the blood costs of defense. It’s wishful thinking descendants of families who died over, negotiated, settled and established a history in a particular terrain—no matter how unfairly acquired—will relinquish it without force. What makes the family homestead valuable are the costs incurred to keep it.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  Then what prevents me from coming and making a "private exchange" of your life for your stuff? I dig a deep hole somewhere. I incurred significant costs to do so. Is that hole now valuable?
  - pgayed 6y ago
    > a "private exchange" of your life for your stuff? What stops you from attempting that now? Consequences. You're assuming you would not also be putting your life at risk attempting to do so? (I'm not talking about state enforcement or punishment. We are all free to protect ourselves.) As for your "deep hole", note I said the homestead is valuable because of the costs incurred to _keep_ it.