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

Noble prize winner club is meritocracy, our society as a whole is not and never will be.

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.

These are 'human conditions' and are not unique to Capitalism, but these human conditions prevent Capitalism from becoming a meritocracy. Your claim that "Capitalism sans X, Y, Z is a meritocracy" is not a valid argument, since "sans X, Y, Z" will never happen outside of very controlled conditions controlling for 'human conditions'.

If you are trying to have a rational/logical debate, please stick to the statements/claims I actually made.


You did not clearly make them, but you were obviously trying to imply them. It should have been self-evident that these conditions applied universally, thus pointing it out in direct response to Capitalism can and should be taken the way it was taken.

Since we are comparing system of govt, all comparisons are relative to the types of govt being discussed. The burden lies on you to make a case that these human conditions are a greater detrimental effect on society under Capitalism than other forms of governance.. which is a difficult proposition because history has shown the opposite to be true time and again. Much better tactical tack to throw out an allusion while trying to retain plausible deniability and hope you dont get called on it, as you did.

Compared to a centrally planned system, Capitalism is indeed a meritocracy. The human traits you describe have been overcome by budding Capitalists again and again, because incidental cases of human failings have nowhere near the negative effect that a govt that acts in a large scale organized fashion to repress individuals has.

It should be self evident that an individual has a better chance to flourish in a system where the govt is small, accountable and focused on protecting his individual rights than in a system where the govt is large, unaccountable, and focused on centrally managing the lives of everyone.

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