Capitalism and big government

By -
"History shows, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the growth of capitalism and the growth of government go hand in hand. Capitalism and big government are not, as in the popular imagination and the economic treatises, things opposed; rather, the one grows on the back of the other, and the more you get of one, the more you will need of the other.” -- John Médaille



Comments

  1. Samson Corwell1:18 PM

    As one anarchist I talk to said, "Capitalism absolutely requires the Leviathan.".

    ReplyDelete
  2. KPres1:00 PM

    So the Soviets were extreme capitalists?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Samson Corwell2:32 PM

      Some comparisons have been made between the Soviet Union and a giant corporation, so there's that. "Big government" is often a rather vacuous and vague phrase, anyway.

      Delete
    2. gcallah2:58 PM

      KPres, did you think *at all* before making this comment. The contention is that capitalism leads to the growth of big government.

      That is similar to saying, "Smoking leads to cancer."

      Your response is like responding, "My mother had cancer: therefore, I guess you are saying she must have smoked?!"

      Delete
    3. Samson Corwell6:07 PM

      Or, to put in another (if I get the gist of the argument), big defense agencies.

      Delete
  3. Thomas L. Knapp7:18 PM

    Medaille is a distributist, but this is nothing that left-libertarians haven't been saying since, oh, forever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah7:23 PM

      I am very proud of you left-libertarians. I will give extra credit here.

      Delete
  4. Lorenzo1:20 AM

    How do you define "more capitalism?" If capitalism is the the private control of capital then we have a definitional problem as the statement implies that the more private control of capital there is, the bigger government is. But the government share of GDP figures will then not really fit.

    Perhaps by "more capitalism" is meant "the more concentrated the private control of capital" the bigger government. Which might work, since Sweden has a highly concentrated private sector. But then there is a chicken and egg problem, because the more pervasive government, the more it tends to favour concentration of capital.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah1:51 AM

      But if we think the two processes go together, we don't really have to worry about which is the chicken or the egg.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more