SeaGypsy wrote:Capitalism is not about logic; it's about human nature and along with democracy is designed to undo the tendency of dictatorial systems to cyclicly revolt.
Inevitably it is human nature to blame the government for all manner of deprivations; democracy allows bloodless revenge. In this way democracy is state controlled psuedo-revolution.
The state remains controlled by the bankers regardless; that is capitalism. The hand in the glove. While banksters are in charge of the world; why would they permit, encourage or associate with agencies sponsoring their demise? They effectively own governments, the propoganda machine and almost all subsidiery business; what chance has any serious opposition got?
More than a failed religion; i would say communism is a failed business model.
Communism does not contemplate business (mercantilism or capitalism) so I am not quite sure where it has failed. In fact, communism's ongoing demonisation is testimony to the fear it generates in our masters. An ignorance of its logic, an ignorance of what capitalism really is, gives rise to such nonsense as capitalism being human nature.
That exchange is an essential aspect of existence is a given. In exchange for our labour, we derive the means to survive and where a sufficient surplus is created, enjoy leisurely moments. However, to argue that the application of passive private wealth to the generation of accumulated capital is human nature stands the notion of capital, intangibalisation, capitalisation and accumulation on its head.
Capitalism saw its genesis in the rise of the corporation, more particularly banks (the East Indian companies, the Hudson Bay company and Lloyds bank to name a few), along with the advent of non-real wealth and non-Jewish usury. Whereas in the past, feudalism was largely limited to real wealth with strict proscriptions for the management of usury, the rise of large scale banking along with these intangible asset vehicles as well as the gentilisation of usury saw the rise of capital, hot on the heels of the Reformation incidentally.
The logic of dialectical social economy is that with the increased globalisastion of this model will rise an increasing competition for the consumer dollar and stressed bottom lines, a global culture that defies the parochialism of the barbarian, increasing pauperisation of the global worker as deregulation is increasingly resorted to in a bid to prop up profits, the chasing of markets by capital in a bid to generate increasing annual profits and the rise of full scale commodification as everything is reduced to a use value with the increasing commodification of intellectual property and increasing resort to capitalisation of what was previously the socialised (bailouts as well as Quantitative easing).
This is a natural process, the inevitable confluence of events that started with the onset of rudimentary mercantilism in early history. No amount of hand wringing could possibly have halted these events. Nor will any fancy notion of ethical mercantilism halt capitalism's inevitable collapse. It will eat itself from within in a desperate quest for decreasing surplus.