the interventionist model is not a hybrid, though it looks like that to us partly due to propaganda. In fact it is the original model, whether tribal laws or kings regulate some processes and prices and practices and what can and can't be sold.
Capitalism as you describe it, presupposes the goodness of humanity left to itself, unregulated, which is biblically false.
the "claim that capitalism inevitably and necessarily encourages individual actions and produces social structures that oppress and harm people" is true enough, when the capitalist has enough money and enough control over others through the govt., or through being the only game in town having ganged up with his or her peers to eliminate competition. The abuses of the 1800s that led to the union movement ended in laws that made mandatory things about safety and pay and so forth that once were to be had only through strikes (which were often suppressed by police and army gunfire at the request of the big crony capitalists), and we take for granted. (Also added by some laws and court decisions were limitations on big money power to combine and set prices and so forth. These anti trust and so forth laws have increasingly been undermined or evaded.)
socialism presupposes human goodness in that supposedly a central controlling dictating body will be virtuous though made up of fallen humans.
the interventionist model is the only thing that balances all these things. Because of human evil it will not always work perfectly either, but it is more easily corrected if there is a free press, that is not owned (as now) by a handful of super rich elites at the top of a plethora of corporations, transparency, and the popular vote.
No comments:
Post a Comment