Capitalism & Human Values

[zorro]

And, Bopal and Katrina were not covered up or bury the story like China tried to do with the rail accident.

[chaz wyman]

And, Bopal and Katrina were not covered up or bury the story like China tried to do with the rail accident.

Is that all you've got?

Fact 1. You know about the the rail story so it was not covered up.

Fact 2. The negligence of the governments failure to provide levees was covered up, it took a long time for the truth to emerge that 1500 death could have been avoided quite cheaply.

Bhopal resulted in around 3000 immediate deaths, 8000 subsequent deaths and around 1000000 poisoned.
Half of those case have been rejected and the awards given in compensation were pitiful.

I think the idea of covering up is beyond a joke.

What you are suffering from is a psychological problem of confirmational selection. You deduce that capitalism is good, so everything associated with the western world that is also good you claim a victory for capitalism, everything in the world that is bad you put it down to same other factor; either capitalism is not working right, or its due to communism. This is called selective bias in the world of science.
You are a walking joke.

[spike]

Don't listen to Chaz. He is such an ass. The derailment in China was originally a covered up story on TV and in print. The authorities tried to whitewash it. It was survivors and family members with cell phones who got the real story out.

Chaz:

You are a walking joke.

Well, he is a zombie, a zombie in a bubble.

[chaz wyman]

Don't listen to Chaz. He is such an ass. The derailment in China was originally a covered up story on TV and in print. The authorities tried to whitewash it. It was survivors and family members with cell phones who got the real story out.
.

You've not heard of Watergate then?
How about Oliver North?

[spike]

You've not heard of Watergate then?
How about Oliver North?

Those things also changed a nation when they were uncovered.

[chaz wyman]

You've not heard of Watergate then?
How about Oliver North?

Those things also changed a nation when they were uncovered.

You are sadly naive.

[John]

But things are changing in China as capitalism marches on there. Capitalism is slowly emancipating people and giving them a voice to criticize government and hold it accountable. This rail accident may be a turning point for the Chinese, with people getting more respect.

Capitalist/free market countries give their citizens more respect and recognition, human values we all appreciate.

This remains to be seen as we could just end up with a bloc of authoritarian-capitalist countries and it would be unwise to assume the Western experience will be a universal one. I believe you're in danger on conflating liberalism and capitalism through a biased perspective.

There's an interesting short article on the NY Times website from 2007 that has some relevance here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/14/opini ... 37311.html.

[spike]

You are sadly naive.

Well, I guess I couldn't expect any other response from lefty pessimists.

[spike]

This remains to be seen as we could just end up with a bloc of authoritarian-capitalist countries and it would be unwise to assume the Western experience will be a universal one. I believe you're in danger on conflating liberalism and capitalism through a biased perspective.

There's an interesting short article on the NY Times website from 2007 that has some relevance here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/14/opini ... 37311.html.

I really appreciate with what your are saying but I do think Western values are become universal ones. And they slowly are becoming so, starting with human rights and capitalism. Look at the western aesthetics the world is revolving around, from women's fashion to classical music to skyscrapers to technology.

I understandable why China and Russia are authoritarian in their capitalism, because if they had gone straight to liberal capitalism the countries couldn't have handle it. It would be too chaotic for them since they haven't had the centuries of experience the West has had with liberal capitalism. But over the long term they will have to liberalize if they want to continue growing and remain viable.

China and Russia were far more authoritarian 20 years ago.

[chaz wyman]

You are sadly naive.

Well, I guess I couldn't expect any other response from lefty pessimists.

More naivety.

[spike]

More naivety.

This from a Neanderthal zombie?

[John]

This remains to be seen as we could just end up with a bloc of authoritarian-capitalist countries and it would be unwise to assume the Western experience will be a universal one. I believe you're in danger on conflating liberalism and capitalism through a biased perspective.

There's an interesting short article on the NY Times website from 2007 that has some relevance here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/14/opini ... 37311.html.

I really appreciate with what your are saying but I do think Western values are become universal ones. And they slowly are becoming so, starting with human rights and capitalism. Look at the western aesthetics the world is revolving around, from women's fashion to classical music to skyscrapers to technology.

It's hard not to view this in the context of the time period we're currently living in but if this trend is the dominant one we need to remember that it's over a relatively short period in human history. The pace of change has been tremendous over the last few centuries so I still think it's too early to call. For example, who knows how liberal democracies will fare when the resources that they've built much of their prosperity on become depleted or if the next paradigm shift favours non Western countries (China's holding lot of cards when it comes to rare earth metals for example).

I understand why China and Russia are authoritarian in their capitalism, because if they had gone straight to liberal capitalism the countries couldn't have handle it. It would be too chaotic for them since they haven't had the centuries of experience the West has had with liberal capitalism. But over the long term they will have to liberalize if they want to continue growing and remain viable.

I agree with your first point but unfortunately this was a message the IMF and the West largely ignored when it encouraged former Soviet states to adopt market economies in the early 90s. The necessary institutions weren't there and we can see the effect of that in Russia.

China and Russia were far more authoritarian 20 years ago.

I think Russia is possibly going backwards but China may be a bit more liberal than it was. However, we need to make sure we don't confuse economic liberalism with political liberalism because China still has a very low tolerance of dissent.

[spike]

John:

It's hard not to view this in the context of the time period we're currently living in but if this trend is the dominant one we need to remember that it's over a relatively short period in human history. The pace of change has been tremendous over the last few centuries so I still think it's too early to call. For example, who knows how liberal democracies will fare when the resources that they've built much of their prosperity on become depleted or if the next paradigm shift favours non Western countries (China's holding lot of cards when it comes to rare earth metals for example).

This reminds me of a response when somebody was asked about the success of the French Revolution two hundred years later: "It's to early to tell.

Well, we know that the French Revolution, like the American Revolution, was a success. The revolution of capitalism has been around for just as long and all the time it is gaining momentum. More countries are participating in it and as they do there are incremental changes for the better. South Korea and Taiwan were once authoritarian capitalist states. But eventually that led to democratic representation, because the citizens demanded it.

There is no hard evidence that resources are being depleted. (Resources have been said to be depleting since Malthus' time.) China is not the only country with rare earth metals. They are redeveloping mines in California that were abandoned in favor of China's mines because those metals were cheaper. I believe Malaysia is developing new mines also.

I agree with your first point but unfortunately this was a message the IMF and the West largely ignored when it encouraged former Soviet states to adopt market economies in the early 90s. The necessary institutions weren't there and we can see the effect of that in Russia.

The West was truly naive in thinking that Russian and other like it could adopt liberal capitalism just like that. America was naive in thinking that Iraq would become democratic just like that. The West, though, has learned something from those experiences and that is why it is not interfering too much with the "Arab Spring" countries, because it knows the learning of democracy is a slow and painful process that just can't be parachuted in or enacted by will. Peoples can only learn for themselves the balances required to handle democracy and capitalism.

[spike]

John:

It's hard not to view this in the context of the time period we're currently living in but if this trend is the dominant one we need to remember that it's over a relatively short period in human history. The pace of change has been tremendous over the last few centuries so I still think it's too early to call. For example, who knows how liberal democracies will fare when the resources that they've built much of their prosperity on become depleted or if the next paradigm shift favours non Western countries (China's holding lot of cards when it comes to rare earth metals for example).

This reminds me of a response when somebody was asked about the success of the French Revolution two hundred years later: "It's to early to tell.

Well, we know that the French Revolution, like the American Revolution, was a success. The revolution of capitalism has been around for just as long and all the time it is gaining momentum. More countries are participating in it and as they do there are incremental changes for the better. South Korea and Taiwan were once authoritarian capitalist states. But eventually that led to democratic representation, because the citizens demanded it.

There is no hard evidence that resources are being depleted. (Resources have been said to be depleting since Malthus' time.) China is not the only country with rare earth metals. They are redeveloping mines in California that were abandoned in favor of China's mines because those metals were cheaper. I believe Malaysia is developing new mines also.

I agree with your first point but unfortunately this was a message the IMF and the West largely ignored when it encouraged former Soviet states to adopt market economies in the early 90s. The necessary institutions weren't there and we can see the effect of that in Russia.

The West was truly naive in thinking that Russian and other like it could adopt liberal capitalism just like that. America was naive in thinking that Iraq would become democratic just like that. The West, though, has learned something from those experiences and that is why it is not interfering too much with the "Arab Spring" countries, because it knows the learning of democracy is a slow and painful process that just can't be parachuted in or enacted by will. Peoples can only learn for themselves the balances required to handle democracy and capitalism.

[chaz wyman]

Both the American and French revolutions are dead and therefore failures.
They both failed to establish democracy.

Revolutions have to continue to be successful. The American Revolution failed in 1787.
The French as soon as Napoleon seized the imperial crown from the hands of of the Pope to place it on his own head.