Simple capitalism is usually brought up as something sane by anyone as a (ideal hypothetical) stable system where it’s guaranteed that market power and administrative power do not mix. Where money can’t buy laws and license for crime, and where government officials can’t use their position to get financial power.
It is a failure to be fixed for any somewhat popular capitalist ideology I know. For ancaps they are clearly violating NAP. For market liberals they are clearly an oligopoly. One can go on.
Ayn Rand and her following are the only types who, in short, think that power is noble and deserved by itself. For them there’s no NAP - if you can buy license for murder, then it’s fine. And there’s also no value in competition - those who managed to make an oligopoly or a monopoly are by definition noble.
And I have seen such people in the Interwebs, simping for Musk and Trump, thinking something like Colombia is the best place to live, whatever. But that’s frankly just an inferiority complex of people who want to feel themselves tough and thus simp for ideologies where you suffer if you are not tough, kinda burning bridges and feeling apparently it’ll help them.
Like my dad tried to do things the way disadvantageous for an autistic person, that is, me (and himself, of course), as if blackmailing nature into making me different. Of course that doesn’t work.
And I mean we’re talking about ideal concepts here. (At least I have been…) And the real world is way more complex. We don’t have ideal democracy, or capitalism. And things often are entangled or a combination of different factors… I don’t follow the news about those people very closely. But I’d certainly agree with the oligopoly part.
This is true, but not entire truth.
Simple capitalism is usually brought up as something sane by anyone as a (ideal hypothetical) stable system where it’s guaranteed that market power and administrative power do not mix. Where money can’t buy laws and license for crime, and where government officials can’t use their position to get financial power.
It is a failure to be fixed for any somewhat popular capitalist ideology I know. For ancaps they are clearly violating NAP. For market liberals they are clearly an oligopoly. One can go on.
Ayn Rand and her following are the only types who, in short, think that power is noble and deserved by itself. For them there’s no NAP - if you can buy license for murder, then it’s fine. And there’s also no value in competition - those who managed to make an oligopoly or a monopoly are by definition noble.
And I have seen such people in the Interwebs, simping for Musk and Trump, thinking something like Colombia is the best place to live, whatever. But that’s frankly just an inferiority complex of people who want to feel themselves tough and thus simp for ideologies where you suffer if you are not tough, kinda burning bridges and feeling apparently it’ll help them.
Like my dad tried to do things the way disadvantageous for an autistic person, that is, me (and himself, of course), as if blackmailing nature into making me different. Of course that doesn’t work.
Yeah, that won’t work.
And I mean we’re talking about ideal concepts here. (At least I have been…) And the real world is way more complex. We don’t have ideal democracy, or capitalism. And things often are entangled or a combination of different factors… I don’t follow the news about those people very closely. But I’d certainly agree with the oligopoly part.