Is Capitalism inherently dehumanizing?

[Taverner]

Simple question: yes or no

24 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	yes
	12 (50%)
	no
	12 (50%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[NJCher]

1. yes

because it's predatory.


Cher

[dkf]

2. Well Russian communism didnt seem particularly humanizing.

I doubt there is any system that humanizes in all situations. It depends how it's used.

[Taverner]

4. I'm not asking about Soviet Communism. I'm asking about Capitalism. eom

[dkf]

7. My point is there is no system that is inherently humanizing or dehumanizing.

It's all in the implementation.

[daleanime]

13. Surely you jest...

a system take demands competition is always going to favor the inhumane.

[aristocles]

14. The death knell then for all sports and games. n/t

[daleanime]

15. ......

[Peter cotton]

3. No.

Because it's basic to human nature.

[Taverner]

5. So is murder. eom

[Peter cotton]

12. I disagree.

Murder is the unlawful taking of an innocent life; it is something not practiced by the vast majority of people.

You'd have a stronger case for saying that violence in general is endemic to the human condition.

[RZM]

64. Violence is central to human nature

It's central to chimp nature too.

Nowadays it's generally frowned upon. But killing the males in a rival group and taking their women is a good way to get lots and lots of your genes in the next generation.

The world that shaped many of our basic characteristics is quite different from the world today.

[Nye Bevan]

16. Now *there's* a revealing post (nt)

[Ed Suspicious]

26. You've been conditioned to approve of capitalism. It's not some unstoppable force of human nature.

[baldguy]

36. Bullshit. Capitalism isn't a part of human nature any more than feudalism is.

Basic human nature is for the strong to subjugate the weak. When people get together to ameliorate that drive for the good of the majority, we call it Civilization. But, no matter how civilized we believe our society to be we will never eliminate it.

[ZombieHorde]

54. Why do you think capitalism is basic to human nature? nt

[me b zola]

6. Of course it is dehumanizing

You'd have to live a fairly comfortable life and have the ability to justify human suffering to believe differently.

[quinnox]

8. No, but its tricky

I can see a case made for either answer. I voted no, because in theory, capitalism could be done by enlightened individuals, who take into account their employees welfare, and there are indeed companies who operate with this philosophy. But of course, there are some companies who operate very badly and do the opposite. But in theory, if the human race advanced to a more enlightened state, then I can see capitalism working very well.

[redqueen]

9. How could it be?

I don't see how it is, no.

Some kinds of jobs might involve fungibility, or some employers might violate their employees' subjectivity, but inherently? I don't think so.

[Taverner]

24. Consider what you are to most employers

Not Ms Redqueen, but a resource. To be bought and sold.

To the company, you are an object - objectified in a way that would make Hefner blush...

[NCTraveler]

29. None of the people working for me are just objects.

Where do you get this stuff from. First you say murder is human nature, then you are just an object to your employer. Very interesting insight.

[Taverner]

32. So you're the exception. You get a gold star.

And as for murder, if we were led by our animal impulses, murder would be a lot more common.

That's what I meant.

But go ahead and take what I said out of context - it's clear that's a fun activity for you.

[NCTraveler]

34. It is actually exactly what you stated.

Not sure how it was out of context. I don't need a gold star. Not treating employees like objects is such a common occurrence that awards aren't given to all of us.

[Taverner]

40. I said most companies treat employees like objects

Go to any corporation and if you don't feel that's the case, I have a bridge to sell you...

[aristocles]

10. A reality check from the Small Business Administration

Most business owners are not predatory capitalists. They are small business owners, operating on a very thin margin of capital.

http://web.sba.gov/faqs/faqindex.cfm?areaID=24

Small firms:
• Represent 99.7 percent of all employer firms.
• Employ half of all private sector employees.
• Pay 44 percent of total U.S. private payroll.
• Generated 65 percent of net new jobs over the past 17 years.
• Create more than half of the nonfarm private GDP.
• Hire 43 percent of high tech workers ( scientists, engineers, computer programmers, and others).
• Are 52 percent home-based and 2 percent franchises.
• Made up 97.5 percent of all identified exporters and produced 31 percent of export value in FY 2008.
• Produce 13 times more patents per employee than large patenting firms.

[Mika]

71. Thank you. Only about 5% of Americans are capitalists.

The rest are proles scratching out a living (if at all).

[Nye Bevan]

11. Do the Swedes, the Norwegians, the Swiss and the Germans feel dehumanized?

How about the North Koreans?

If capitalism was "inherently dehumanizing", this would apply to every capitalist country.

[aristocles]

18. I don't get your point about the North Koreans. Good economy or bad?

You do realize that North Korea has a centrally planned economy?

[Nye Bevan]

20. I guess one way to address the OP's question is as follows:

who is more dehumanized? The North Koreans or the South Koreans?

[Taverner]

25. If NK was a socialist, or communist state, it might compare well

But NK is less about Marx and more about the Kim clan...

[Nye Bevan]

35. The question was about capitalism.

SK is capitalist. NK is not.

[randome]

17. The only thing that makes capitalism unwieldy is there are too many people practicing it.

When the population becomes too dense, then competition becomes more a matter of marketing instead of finding useful products to create.

That opens the door to predatory practices, political bribery and outright theft.

I don't often believe in simple solutions to complex questions but I do think if we reduced our population by at least a third, many of our current problems would disappear.

[olddots]

45. Wisest comment so far

thank you

[LittleBlue]

19. No. It's about how you control that capitalism

and whether there are adequate safety nets for those who fall through the cracks.

[Taverner]

33. I don't think one can "bell the cat"

The bell the cat ref is to an Aesop's Fable. Mice get together and decide if they just put a bell on the cat, they'd be warned when she came by. Every one agreed, but one lone voice emerged and asked "who will bell the cat?"

So who will control Capitalism? The elected officials bought and paid for by the companies they are supposed to regulat?

[MyshkinCommaPrince]

21. Hmm.

I think our current model of corporate capitalism is dehumanizing. Richard D. Wolff has some interesting thoughts on a model of cooperative capitalism. A form of capitalist system which allows people to have some control over their own lives might not be too horrid. A well-regulated system which reins in the worst excesses and allows people to be people could perhaps provide more good results for society than bad.

The model of cutthroat competition, success at any cost, and anything goes as long as you can get away with it is just plain rotten. The corporate model in which even well-intended participants are required to do destructive or hurtful things for short term profit is no good. The model requiring continuous growth at full speed is presumably unsustainable in a closed system with limited resources. The way we're doing it now is just no damned good. But perhaps some variant form of capitalism could be better.

[msongs]

22. walmart vs costco. if you shop at either, you support "capitalism" of one sort or the other nt

[Recursion]

23. No more than any "system" is

When it's harnessed to do good, it can create amazing and wonderful benefits. When it's left to follow its own systemic tendency, just like socialism has shown, there is no need it will not ignore, no institution it will not destroy, and no boundary it will not obliterate.

America is a decent place to live under capitalism, and would be under socialism too. Russia was a shitty place to live under communism, and is a shitty place to live today. The problem is not the form.

[killbotfactory]

27. Reducing people's ability to live and the power over their own lives to a sum of their money...

Is dehumanizing, yes. The amount of human potential squandered because we don't invest in regular people, helping them have more stable homes and healthy neighborhoods, food security, and spending the capital it takes to make sure we are all educated to our fullest potential is depressing. It's not merely a system to efficiently allocate resources, it's a system that rewards a relatively few people enormously, giving them wealth and power beyond reason, and dis-empowers and wastes the human potential of millions while making people suffer needlessly.

[Rex]

28. No, but Commericalism is.

Capitalism is only as good as the leaders in charge. Same with any form of economics that places profit over human welfare.

[el_bryanto]

30. Do people need each other? Should they?

Are you more you when you are completely by yourself?

It's a moot point - we have too many people to provide for without some sort of economic system, and economic systems are by their nature dehumanizing. Some more so than others. As others have noted Capitalism is a step up from Stalinism.

Also, of cousre, there are varieties of Capitalism.

Bryant

[NCTraveler]

31. It can be dehumanizing, just as it can be rewarding.

But neither are inherent traits of capitalism.

[Taverner]

41. Capitalism does not take need into consideration. All it cares for is profit.

[NCTraveler]

42. Incorrect. Capitalism considers many human needs and cares for them.

Not all corporations are profitable, yet are still successful.

[Taverner]

43. By law, the only thing a corporation is concerned with is the stockholders

For a publicly held company, to not serve the stockholders is to break the law

[NCTraveler]

44. You have an extremely limited view of corporations.

Do you know how many ways a stockholder can be served? How many stockholders are there in a majority of corporations in the US?

[KittyWampus]

53. You have failed to define your terms and adequately flesh out an argument. Your OP is too narrow.

[Kalidurga]

37. American capitalism yes...

I don't want to get into a corporations are evil meme on this. Individual corporations might be ok-great or bad-downright evil. The problem isn't so much to do with individual businesses and corporations. The problem is no business or corporation works in a vacuum. Many smaller businesses are hurt by the current system, they can't afford lobbyists to skew the rules to favor them over larger businesses. GE pays virtually no taxes, I doubt any small business can do the same thing. So, our system overall favors big business and corporations and takes the most from those at the bottom.

[moondust]

38. Unregulated capitalism

tends to create a jungle in which the bigger predators kill off the smaller.

[patrice]

39. Project the NEED for profit, that's the NEED itself, out to its nth degree; that would be a

very inhuman set of circumstances and, yet, any system that runs on nothing but a specific single thing, in this case - profit, is going to experience increasing NEED if that vital "food" is a zero sum commodity.

A capitalist "solution" to this problem is to make that resource, in this case - profit, NOT a zero sum commodity, which introduces the question of HOW that could happen. And if that HOW, if the means by which you make profit a non-zero sum commodity, is profit itself, then at some point you get what happened in the Derivative Crash of '08, something like profit fractiles that DO NOTHING (else) but create more NEED for more profit.

[Yavin4]

46. Unregulated, Unchecked Capitalism Is Far More Than Dehumanizing. It's flat out immoral.

Capitalism is an economic system wherein the capitalists class controls everything and makes all of the laws. If the Capitalists want to pollute your drinking water and kill you in order to make a profit, then so be it.

Because of unions, FDR, the civil rights movement, the feminist movement, the environmentalist movement, progressive regulations, etc., most Americans have been protected from pure, unregulated capitalism.

[aristocles]

56. As always, there is no easy answer

Regulated capitalism has been partly resonsible for driving US jobs overseas, because of the higher labor costs here and higher corporate taxes.

[Yavin4]

58. Jobs going overseas has nothing to do with regulations or taxes.

Jobs going overseas has everything to do with lower labor costs. In fact, that is an example of unregulated capitalism.

[aristocles]

59. Regulations and taxes make the cost of doing business here too high.

Why does Apple build its products in China? No high corporate tax, no manufacturing health and safety regulations, and much lower wages. Just one example of many.

[Yavin4]

68. The "high cost of doing business" is a subjective measure

Look at Germany. Their industries pay middle class wages to unionized employees. They have much tighter regulations and higher taxes, yet their economy is doing fine. Their businesses are doing fine.

American businesses are going overseas out of pure greed.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

60. "Workers of the WORLD, unite!" is still a good idea.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

47. Cottage industries, small businesses, proprietorships, start-ups

All examples of people take charge of their own lives -- and that is very humanizing.

[aristocles]

48. Thank you! n/t

[cbrer]

49. NO- Not ONLY has capitalism produced the greatest wealth and lifestyle enrichening ever in history,

It has spread it the widest and furthest throughout the world!

Fucking ever!

Just because our fine citizens have chosen to sit on their (our) collective fat asses while Psychopaths rig the system and make off with trillions of dollars, does NOT mean that Capitalism is "inherently" bad.

[patrice]

50. I get this, but "the market" is no check on this problem with capitalism, so . . . ?

[cbrer]

55. A truly free market has never been tried in the USA

Might be interesting to see if it could work...

But free market forces aren't necessarily the only ingredient for capitalistic success. At some point we have to regulate for even distribution of wealth, or we get...this.

It comes down to the practitioners. And the involvement of its citizens. Our version of capitalism could become sustainable over a long term if wealth were distributed more evenly.

[lumberjack_jeff]

51. Yes. It rationalizes human well-being as a secondary benefit of profit.

Profit is the end instead of the means.

Is profit is a good vehicle to promote human progress and wellbeing? That is a different question, one in which I'm inclined to agree.

But yes, capitalism reduces people to "consumers" and "labor". The welfare of those who don't fall into those two categories is only important to the degree that civil unrest is bad for business.

[KittyWampus]

52. No. It's an economic system that allows private ownership of property. It's inherently individualist

But that is far different than saying it's dehumanizing.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

57. Yes. But, not as much as cannibalism.

[L0oniX]

61. ...you can't eat money...

[Starry Messenger]

62. Yes.

And because I don't feel like replying to everyone in the thread who said it, small businesses are not capitalistic. Capital is stocks, monopolies, huge industry, privatizing of the commons, Wall Street and the finance sector that services all. There have always been small businesses in history--capitalism is different.

[aristocles]

63. Capitalism ... Simple

Private ownership of the means of production and the distribution of goods motived by profit.

A cobbler is a capitalist.

You're taking practices you don't like and making them the terms of your definition.

[Starry Messenger]

65. No, I'm not. But thanks, new guy.

[aristocles]

66. Okay.

[Yavin4]

67. A Cobbler is a Capitalist Only If He/She Owns Capital

If the cobbler owns his shop out right, then yes, he/she is a capitalist. However, if that cobbler is in debt to a bank, then he/she is not a capitalist.

[socialist_n_TN]

69. So let's kick this again........

Interesting results.

[Taverner]

70. Yep. I'd say 75% of the people who responded don't know what a capitalist is...

Or capitalism for that matter...

Or hell, socialism or communism....


Sad