Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

capitalism is a Government Program
ABC This Week | 1/13/2002 | George Will

Posted on 01/13/2002 8:05:27 AM PST by tonyinv

George Will just uttered the most absurd statement I've ever heard. He said (paraphrasing)

"Rebpublicans need to understand that capitalism is complex web of laws and regulations" and further "that capitalism is a government program"

I knew George Will wasn't exactly a conservative, but this is unbelievable.


TOPICS: Editorial; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-165 next last
To: Cobra64
Guess he never read Adam Smith.

Not sure what you mean.

... The affluence of the rich excites the indignation of the poor, who are often both driven by want, and prompted by envy, to invade his possessions. It is only under the shelter of the civil magistrate that the owner of that valuable property, which is acquired by the labour of many years, or perhaps of many successive generations, can sleep a single night in security. He is at all times surrounded by unknown enemies, whom, though he never provoked, he can never appease, and from whose injustice he can be protected only by the powerful arm of the civil magistrate continually held up to chastise it. The acquisition of valuable and extensive property, therefore, necessarily requires the estabilishment of civil government. Where there is no property, or at least none that exceeds the value of two or three days labour, civil government is not so necessary.
Adam Smith, "The Wealth of Nations", page 408 in my Oxford World's Classics edition.

Emphasis mine.

So, in other words, in the eyes of Adam Smith, protection of individual property rights is a government program. One could even argue he considers it the government program.

101 posted on 01/13/2002 10:34:45 AM PST by TheOracle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
White man? What does that mean.
102 posted on 01/13/2002 10:35:23 AM PST by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
I refuse to believe it is human nature to be greedy. We are social by nature People are not necessarily greedy --- you miss the point for the word. People act in their self-interest. And, incidentally, they are social only when it is in their self-interest.

even some of my atheist friends live such that they treat others always as they themselves wish to be treated. This is because the atheist friends internalized the product of the Judeo-Christian morality into which they are immersed, although they chose to dispose from its source.

Once internalized, these values constitute your friend's preferences, which they, in turn, implement in their behavior.

103 posted on 01/13/2002 10:36:41 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: weikel; askel5; LaBelleDameSansMerci
"What do we call someone who doesn't believe in capitalism?"

So many names to choose from!

Whistle-blower
Party-pooper
Bush-basher
Christian conservative

or my personal favorite:

heretic

104 posted on 01/13/2002 10:37:08 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: cicero's_son
All good but thats not the one Im looking for. It begins with a C.
105 posted on 01/13/2002 10:38:29 AM PST by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: weikel
The joke is that you think we still practice in the West anything Adam Smith might recognize as Capitalism.
106 posted on 01/13/2002 10:39:03 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
"What's this "we" business, white man? "

Askel I'm shocked! Please tell me it isn't so? A racist statement from you?

107 posted on 01/13/2002 10:39:20 AM PST by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Askel5
No, I do not mind. Should you post, however, please include a note indicating that it was not written as an essay (I would have exercised more care in writing).
108 posted on 01/13/2002 10:39:33 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: cicero's_son
I agree weve drifted into pseudo socialism but not irrevocably so. Thats what happens when you extend the franchise outside of the upper class.
109 posted on 01/13/2002 10:40:34 AM PST by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: weikel
One or the other, right?

You're either with us or you're against us.

Please. I hope you don't take it as flattery if I tell you that you're obviously too intelligent to believe what you say.

110 posted on 01/13/2002 10:41:18 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
. Among many of those laws are those that, for example, protect private property, This was a prt, if I remember correctly, of the Hammurabi Code as well, which has nothing to do with Christianity.

Oh, I see where our divergence odccured: you said "our" religious beliefs, and I took it as written to mean Christianity or Judaism. You probably meant "one's beliefs" in general, in which case I am fully with you. Sorry.

111 posted on 01/13/2002 10:42:21 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: weikel; askel5
"I agree we've drifted into pseudo-socialism..."

Be very, very careful weikel. You've just drifted into pseudo-Askel5ism!

Seriously, though, if you believe this, then you probably aren't so far apart from her as your invocation of the "C" word might suggest...

112 posted on 01/13/2002 10:43:50 AM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: cicero's_son
I said I agree weve drifted into pseudo socialism I didn't say I was happy about it.
113 posted on 01/13/2002 10:44:45 AM PST by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: tonyinv
Bless you George Will!!! There is a God!!! parsy.
114 posted on 01/13/2002 10:45:59 AM PST by parsifal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark; Askel5
riend's -> friends'. Sorry for my poor hands coordination.
115 posted on 01/13/2002 10:46:38 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
The fact that the trade occurred "between states" says nothing about it being capitalistic or otherwise.

The example of capitalism between nation states shows that capitalism can exist without an over ridding legal authority with jurisdiction to define property rights. Therefore, capitalism does not require government oversight of property rights for it to exist.

116 posted on 01/13/2002 10:46:47 AM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: StriperSniper
[me]I don't know how you properly enforce the rules outside a legitimate representative government.

[you].38
.357
.44
etc.

I did say "properly". This is exactly the kind of thinking that, according to Adam Smith, requires the institution of governments to protect individual property rights. Physical possession and a gun do not define legal ownership.

117 posted on 01/13/2002 10:49:50 AM PST by TheOracle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
The sentence "that capitalism is [also] a government program" would seem correct to me if it means, as supported by the context, that the government has to strengthen the institution of capitalism.

Which isn't exactly an alien thought of George Will's; he made much the same argument in his 1983 book, Statecraft as Soulcraft: What Government Does. Indeed, he has argued over much of his career that among government's legitimate business is not merely strengthening capitalism but addressing and regulating the things capitalism would effect, so far as customers' preferences and the like are concerned. His is more of a kind of 18th or early 19th century Toryism. I frankly prefer him as what he once said was his prime ambition: I hope to reverse Mr. (James) Reston's course. I want to be a baseball writer when I grow up.
118 posted on 01/13/2002 10:50:17 AM PST by BluesDuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus
The example of capitalism between nation states This sentence is internally inconsitent. There is no such thing as "capitalism between" anything.

shows that capitalism can exist without an over ridding legal authority with jurisdiction to define property rights. Once again, you confuse free trade with capitalism. Free trade may indeed exist between governments. It existed also between Neanderthals. This has nothing to do with capitalism.

119 posted on 01/13/2002 10:51:26 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: BluesDuke
I frankly prefer him as what he once said was his prime ambition: I hope to reverse Mr. (James) Reston's course. I want to be a baseball writer when I grow up. Well, to paraphrase Iacoca, "if you can find a better wtiter, read him."
120 posted on 01/13/2002 10:53:21 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-165 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson