Yes, something which cannot be as easily rectified is a greater evil. A thorn which can easily be removed does less damage than one which is deeply embedded.
Yes, something which cannot be as easily rectified is a greater evil. A thorn which can easily be removed does less damage than one which is deeply embedded.
Hmm, I don't agree. Just because it's difficult to rectify doesn't mean it's a fundamentally more evil thing. More damaging, yes, as it's given more time to do its damage. Isn't evil is better indicated by damage-done/time, as opposed to just damage-done?
not all individual liberties are capitalism-based, but capitalism is a form of individual liberty though, isn't it? why would you hate capitalism while appreciating the principles of individual freedom which conforms to capitalism's basic principles
Yes, something which cannot be as easily rectified is a greater evil. A thorn which can easily be removed does less damage than one which is deeply embedded.
Just to give an (unpleasant) example to illustrate the previous point: compare "regular" murder, of citizens by citizens, to government-orchestrated mass-murder (e.g. genocide). The former has been around practically forever, and is incredibly difficult to root out entirely. The latter is far rarer, and is - relatively - much easier to prevent. But surely genocide is more evil than the murder of private citizens by each-other?
Hmm, I don't agree. Just because it's difficult to rectify doesn't mean it's a fundamentally more evil thing. More damaging, yes, as it's given more time to do its damage. Isn't evil is better indicated by damage-done/time, as opposed to just damage-done?
Even if we accept that, there's no indication that religion has been less harmful over the last 1000 years than capitalist corruption. Capitalism after all, is a newer concept than religion.
Even if we accept that, there's no indication that religion has been less harmful over the last 1000 years than capitalist corruption. Capitalism after all, is a newer concept than religion.
Exactly, it hasn't had as much time as religion to "be harmful".
By damage-done/time, I meant the rate at which damage is being done. So something like the Holocaust, which did an extraordinary amount of harm in a relatively short period, would be more evil than, say, a racist legal system, which does much less damage over the same length of time.
what are you talking about? liberty means you can do whatever you want without coercing others. if you want to be greedy in this society, surely that's your right? why not? how not? I could be giving a lot of my money to charity right now but I'm greedy so I don't (like most people) - am I a criminal?
what are you talking about? liberty means you can do whatever you want without coercing others. if you want to be greedy in this society, surely that's your right? why not? how not? I could be giving a lot of my money to charity right now but I'm greedy so I don't (like most people) - am I a criminal?
But what about the liberty of the people that are used to fulfil that greed?
who are you referring to? poor people? freedom of contract (capitalism) means that both parties, both the employer and the employee, or the consumer and the merchant, have to get mutual consent to a deal or a contract. there is no principle exploitation. only rational agents who know what is in their best interests, and a government shouldn't undermine the intelligence of contractors, either poor or rich.
I doubt they're able to refuse as they need to make a living
They still have the liberty to refuse and start their own business, work for somebody better or go live alone in a cave somewhere. They're not enslaved.
not all individual liberties are capitalism-based, but capitalism is a form of individual liberty though, isn't it? why would you hate capitalism while appreciating the principles of individual freedom which conforms to capitalism's basic principles
I never said that any liberty was capitalism based, quite the opposite. I just observed that you were speaking as if capitalism and individual liberty are one and the same. Evidently (and thankfully) you more or less think otherwise.
But liberty by it's very nature should not and does not conform to anything. It simply happens to fall hand in hand with capitalism on many fronts. But not all. They are altogether separate. If anything capitalism was designed to (and does) condone and encourage many individual liberties - to conform to liberty, but it does not achieve this fully, either deliberately or just in itself. It has consequences and restricts liberty for, and punishes those who won't or who are simply unable to conform to it. It refuses to help those who lack, or are simply unable to earn enough money, even through no fault of their own. The rich benefit more.
Although as I keep saying I cannot think of a better alternative to capitalism. So I cannot hate it. But I cannot say that it is morally good. I feel that a system that requires money and greed to work (and not well at that) cannot be morally good. Yet I concede that a system not based on money and greed will not work at all.