[Cyrus]

The problem with capitalists is that their triumphalism inhibits their thinking. It is quite arrogant to assume that everything that went before is leading to capitalism, that capitalism should be adopted "as-is" by every country, that the conditions in every country or region might differ (and differ radically) but capitalism should be applied exactly the same way, etc etc.

The free market works in some areas of human endeavour, and should not even suggested for others. For instance, I would challenge anyone to demonstrate that, in a road crossing, the rule of the free market (ie, no signs or lamps at all, the motorists negotiating in situ the priority) is better than total government regulation (ie traffic lights).

You are making a false assumption when you are assuming that the government, through its regulations and enforcement agencies, will guide you to the best restaurant, for example. That's not what the government is supposed to be there for! The government is supposed to be ensuring a minimum of safety, security, and fair play for one and all -- and that's all there is to it!

And if an business owner wants to go beyond what OSHA regulations require for his workshop, then he will be simply trying his initiative in the market : If enough customers reward this, his business will do well, if not, the relative cost disadvantage will force him to see things differently.

In sum, I do not want to see (a) the government regulating everything and (b) neither do I want the "free market" ruling uninhibited. The reason for (a) is because the notion of a democratic government, even in western democracies, is still a misnomer : The citizens are not the government. Rule by self-determination has nothing to do with the kind of representative governance we have. (Yes, outside the western democracies things are worse but so what? We should not be "content with what we have" but instead be trying to reach true democracy.) Therefore, the probability of abuse of power by our (western democratic) government, when it is assigned the authority to rule over everything, is enormous.

As to my unwillingness to assign to the "free market" all authority, the argument is again political: We do not have equality as citizens but as capitalists, in the capitalist system. Money truly talks - a dollar has more "votes" than a dime. I am weary of allowing decisions about human fate (and human economy rules over and affects every aspect of human life, if not the planet itself) to be taken by capital, literally by the power of financial numbers. This would be simply barbaric.

Final words : The economical is political. We have to decide first how we want our society to be governed - and then the matter of how the economy will be working is derived in an obvious manner. The Libertarians have the right approach, as a starting point, by being hostile to government intrusion, but because they go about it for mostly misguided reasons ("Out of my cold dead hands!", etc) they regress quite quickly to primitive social notions, such as survivalism.

--Cyrus