Originally Posted By: sinij
Originally Posted By: Derid
Capitalism sans govt Intervention is a meritocracy.


Not exactly, unless you define popularity and good looks, family connections, inheritance, a lot of luck, and a great deal of ruthlessness and unprincipled backstabbing as a merit.

Noble prize winner club is meritocracy, our society as a whole is not and never will be. Plus 'Capitalism sans govt Intervention' is as much pipe dream as Communism. Wealth concentration leads to Power concentration, this in turn leads to Wealth influencing rules of wealth acquisition. Cronyism and Interventionism aren't deviations, they are inevitable conclusion of Capitalism.


Three refutations to this post are self-evident.

1) You do not know the definition of Interventionism in regards to its scientific and academic terminology. ( Bank bailouts, govt mandates, etc are interventionism. Standard law prohibiting certain types of bad behavior is not.)

2) A small govt focused on protecting liberty, can better protect the smaller business from unfair and illegal assault by larger rivals who employ underhanded means. Large, Interventionist govt is most easily corrupted by nature of the difficulty of holding its small constituent pieces accountable.

3) The effects of "good looks, family connections, inheritance, a lot of luck, and a great deal of ruthlessness and unprincipled backstabbing " are human conditions, not ones strictly regulated to Capitalism. The USSR and other Socialism attempts have proven this, as has just about any iteration of any govt anywhere. That you would ignore this evident reality and attempt to impugn these traits on Capitalism alone has tipped your arguments off the precipice of short-sightedness into the realm of patent absurdity.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)