Capitalism vs. Slavery...lefty dyslexia...a classic example...

[2aguy]

US was built on genocide and slavery,

Here is another chance to point out lefty dyslexia...

Genocide...the extermination of a race of people...(intentional extermination)

Regular people...the nazis committed genocide against Jewish people as well as other groups...they built camps and intentionally murdered them...

lefty dyslexic...when two groups of people from different parts of the world expose each other to diseases they have never been exposed to before and hence have no immunity to them...a lot of them are killed by the new disease...just like the black plague killed off millions of Europeans...the same happened to native Americans exposed to European diseases...to the lefty dyslexic...this accidental exposure to disease is genocide...

 

[georgephillip]

"It is not simply that the labor of enslaved people underwrote 19th-century capitalism.

"Enslaved people were the capital: four million people worth at least $3 billion in 1860, which was more than all the capital invested in railroads and factories in the United States combined.

"Seen in this light, the conventional distinction between slavery and capitalism fades into meaninglessness."

You are conflating "commerce" with "capitalism"...selling a person who is a slave doesn't mean you are practising capitalism...since one party is not free to give his consent to the transaction...

Commerce is the exchange of commodities, and capitalism treats labor as just another commodity. You may not like it, but this country doesn't exist today without genocide and slavery.

 

[2aguy]

First, genocide didn't happen...second...slavery slowed the growth of the south...capitalism is the free exchange of goods and services...with emphasis on the services part...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

"It is not simply that the labor of enslaved people underwrote 19th-century capitalism.

"Enslaved people were the capital: four million people worth at least $3 billion in 1860, which was more than all the capital invested in railroads and factories in the United States combined.

"Seen in this light, the conventional distinction between slavery and capitalism fades into meaninglessness."

You are conflating "commerce" with "capitalism"...selling a person who is a slave doesn't mean you are practising capitalism...since one party is not free to give his consent to the transaction...

Commerce is the exchange of commodities, and capitalism treats labor as just another commodity. You may not like it, but this country doesn't exist today without genocide and slavery.

Capitalism is free exchange of goods and services to the mutual profit of all trading parties. Note that this includes the exchange of service (labor). I assure you it exists as I personally engaged in it, this very day.

I spent an hour engaging my extensive experience, knowledge and tools... which solved a problem for an individual who knew of my skills in resolving such in a timely and professional manner. For that hour of time, I received a couple of hundred bucks.

They were happy, having had their problem resolved, thus representing their profit and I was happy having increased my means to fulfill my own life and that of my family.

Works every single time it is exercised by reasonable people, intent on bearing the responsibilities that sustain their right to exercise their right to do so.

Simple stuff... despite being beyond the means of the intellectually less fortunate.

 

[georgephillip]

What capitalism achieved...

American Capitalism The Engine of Progress The Other Half of History

The Half Has Never Been Told...

mericans tend to cast slavery as a pre-modern institution—the nation’s original sin, perhaps, but isolated in time and divorced from America’s later success. But to do so robs the millions who suffered in bondage of their full legacy.

As historian Edward Baptist reveals in The Half Has Never Been Told, the expansion of slavery in the first eight decades after American independence drove the evolution and modernization of the United States. In the span of a single lifetime, the South grew from a narrow coastal strip of worn-out tobacco plantations to a continental cotton empire, and the United States grew into a modern, industrial, and capitalist economy. Until the Civil War, Baptist explains, the most important American economic innovations were ways to make slavery ever more profitable. Through forced migration and torture,

Forced migration, torture, ethnic cleansing are how US Capitalism came into existence; sorry if that disappoints some of you.

The Half Has Never Been Told Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism Edward E. Baptist 9780465002962 Amazon.com Books

 

[Mac1958]

This article explains why capitalism cannot be equated with slavery and in fact ended slavery...

It also points out the concept of lefty dyslexia...the inability of people on the left to understand basic truths about economics, politics, the law, social systems...

For example...to a regular person...Capitalism is the freedom to engage another person in a business without government interference...the exact opposite of slavery...

To the lefty/democrat/progressive, Capitalism = Slavery

Capitalism slavery TribLIVE

But the most far-fetched myth that I've encountered recently is that the wealth of the modern Western world, especially that of the United States, is the product of slavery.

She anticipated my response. "Not directly. But the capital that made these innovations possible was extracted from slave labor. The wealth accumulated by slaveholders is what financed the industrialization that makes today's wealth possible."

I looked at her in raw disbelief. (Not a good strategy, by the way, for a public speaker.)

Collecting my thoughts, I pointed out that slavery had been an ever-present institution throughout human history until just about 200 years ago. Why didn't slaveholders of 2,000 years ago in Europe or 500 years ago in Asia accumulate wealth that triggered economic growth comparable to ours• Why is Latin America so much poorer today than the United States, given that the Spaniards and Portuguese who settled that part of the world were enthusiastic slavers• Indeed, the last country in the Americas to abolish slavery was Brazil -- in 1888, a quarter-century after U.S. abolition. By American and western European standards, Brazil remains impoverished.

And why, having abolished slavery decades before their Southern neighbors, were Northern U.S. states wealthier than Southern states before the Civil War?

I don't recall my young challenger's response. I recall only that I was as little convinced by it as she was by my answers.

The fact is that slavery disappeared only as industrial capitalism emerged. And it disappeared first where industrial capitalism appeared first: Great Britain. This was no coincidence. Slavery was destroyed by capitalism.

To begin with, the ethical and political principles that support capitalism are inconsistent with slavery. As we Americans discovered, a belief in the universal dignity of human beings, their equality before the law, and their right to govern their own lives cannot long coexist with an institution that condemns some people to bondage merely because of their identity.

The rest of the column is really good as well...

More pseudo-intellectual rightie strawman trash.

No one "equates" capitalism with slavery.

The slave economy is an example of capitalism gone extremely wrong.

You just equated slavery with capitalism.

Is this some sort of Jedi mind trick?

.

Almost made me spit out my beer.

Too funny.

 

[2aguy]

Sorry to disapoint you but slavery slowed down the advance of all the civilizations that used it from the Romans to the Southern United States...capitalism made America the only world superpower in less than 200 years...to the betterment of all the people in the country...not just a tiny ruling class...

 

[2aguy]

From someone who saw both the North and the South...

Tocqueville goes on to describe in detail the differences he saw during his travels in the United States in the early 1830’s. During a trip down the Ohio River, with the slave state of Kentucky on his left and the free state of Ohio on his right, he observed that all the productive activity seemed to be going on to his right:

Upon the left bank of the Ohio labor is confounded with the idea of slavery, upon the right bank it is identified with that of prosperity and improvement; on the one side it is degraded, on the other it is honored; on the former territory no white laborers can be found…on the latter no one is idle, for the white population extends its activity and its intelligence to every kind of employment. Thus the men whose task it is to cultivate the rich soil of Kentucky are ignorant and lukewarm, whilst those who are active and enlightened either do nothing or pass over to the state of Ohio, where they may work without dishonor.4

 

[2aguy]

Slavery was a blight on the south and kept it from advancing...while the capitalist North prospered...

 

[georgephillip]

"It is not simply that the labor of enslaved people underwrote 19th-century capitalism.

"Enslaved people were the capital: four million people worth at least $3 billion in 1860, which was more than all the capital invested in railroads and factories in the United States combined.

"Seen in this light, the conventional distinction between slavery and capitalism fades into meaninglessness."

You are conflating "commerce" with "capitalism"...selling a person who is a slave doesn't mean you are practising capitalism...since one party is not free to give his consent to the transaction...

Commerce is the exchange of commodities, and capitalism treats labor as just another commodity. You may not like it, but this country doesn't exist today without genocide and slavery.

Capitalism is free exchange of goods and services to the mutual profit of all trading parties. Note that this includes the exchange of service (labor). I assure you it exists as I personally engaged in it, this very day.

I spent an hour engaging my extensive experience, knowledge and tools... which solved a problem for an individual who knew of my skills in resolving such in a timely and professional manner. For that hour of time, I received a couple of hundred bucks.

They were happy, having had their problem resolved, thus representing their profit and I was happy having increased my means to fulfill my own life and that of my family.

Works every single time it is exercised by reasonable people, intent on bearing the responsibilities that sustain their right to exercise their right to do so.

Simple stuff... despite being beyond the means of the intellectually less fortunate.

What you've just described is a mode of business that existed for centuries before capitalism and plantation slavery came into being.

What point do you imagine you're making?

 

[Bush92]

Slavery was a blight on the south and kept it from advancing...while the capitalist North prospered...

So why is socialist North not prospering and capitalist Sun Belt prospering in 2014?

 

[2aguy]

What you've just described is a mode of business that existed for centuries before capitalism and plantation slavery came into being.

What point do you imagine you're making?

Well, let me...

Slavery existed long before capitalism existed...here is an article that might explain it better...

 

[georgephillip]

First, genocide didn't happen...second...slavery slowed the growth of the south...capitalism is the free exchange of goods and services...with emphasis on the services part...

Genocide did happen.
Sorry for your right-wing fantasies.
Secondly, northern prosperity came from King Cotton, remember?

 

[Bush92]

Why is North the "Rust Belt?" but the South is booming?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

"It is not simply that the labor of enslaved people underwrote 19th-century capitalism.

"Enslaved people were the capital: four million people worth at least $3 billion in 1860, which was more than all the capital invested in railroads and factories in the United States combined.

"Seen in this light, the conventional distinction between slavery and capitalism fades into meaninglessness."

You are conflating "commerce" with "capitalism"...selling a person who is a slave doesn't mean you are practising capitalism...since one party is not free to give his consent to the transaction...

Commerce is the exchange of commodities, and capitalism treats labor as just another commodity. You may not like it, but this country doesn't exist today without genocide and slavery.

Capitalism is free exchange of goods and services to the mutual profit of all trading parties. Note that this includes the exchange of service (labor). I assure you it exists as I personally engaged in it, this very day.

I spent an hour engaging my extensive experience, knowledge and tools... which solved a problem for an individual who knew of my skills in resolving such in a timely and professional manner. For that hour of time, I received a couple of hundred bucks.

They were happy, having had their problem resolved, thus representing their profit and I was happy having increased my means to fulfill my own life and that of my family.

Works every single time it is exercised by reasonable people, intent on bearing the responsibilities that sustain their right to exercise their right to do so.

Simple stuff... despite being beyond the means of the intellectually less fortunate.

What you've just described is a mode of business that existed for centuries before capitalism and plantation slavery came into being.

What point do you imagine you're making?

Yes, what I just described is the natural order of economics, which eventually came to be known as Capitalism.

The point of which is to refute the nonsense to which I was responding.

 

[2aguy]

You are wrong...again...genocide did not happen...

Skeptic but Jewish Capitalism Ended Slavery

It does not make sense to say that capitalism was responsible for slavery when slavery existed under any system. Indeed, it is possible to make slavery compatible with any system by declaring that the slave class is simply sub-human. These socialists that attack capitalism on the slavery issue fail to realize that in a socialist country the same exact problem can still be present if the state declares a class of people to be slaves. Indeed, this is exactly what happened with Nazi Germany, if you want an example. Nazi Germany was a socialistic country that forced Jews and other groups of people into labor camps to do work for them. That is slavery and it happened under socialism. So other systems also are not immune to practicing slavery.

Therefore, the argument that capitalism was responsible for slavery is a false-cause fallacy. The fallacy arises because one confuses capitalism, a factor with slavery, as being the cause for slavery itself. Not to mention that this is a bad causation to draw from capitalism considering that it correlates with about 7% of all slave history.

My argument is that the opposite is true. It is not that capitalism causes slavery it is rather that capitalism ended slavery. Ever since capitalism appeared as an economic system something interesting begins to happen. Slavery becomes less and less practiced globally. Up to most history slavery was the common institution. Then capitalism becomes more accepted, and when that happens, slavery slowly begins to disappear. So I see capitalism as the liberator of slavery than the other way around as what other people suggest.

 

[georgephillip]

Slavery was a blight on the south and kept it from advancing...while the capitalist North prospered...

So why is socialist North not prospering and capitalist Sun Belt prospering in 2014?

Wage slavery and right to work laws.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Liberals equate capitalism with slavery all the time. "The Man" keeping them down. "Dammit, I work at Burger King, why can't I make as much as an off shore worker. My ass wants $20.00 an hour to make these fucking burgers."

That's because liberals are not capable of taking responsibility for their failures and losses. It's always someone else's fault that they are losers. And who better to blame than the guy who has what they most want?

 

[2aguy]

Another great point...

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ation/?_php=true&_type=blogs&ref=opinion&_r=0

Perhaps most powerful was Atkinson’s attempt to measure the inefficiency of slavery through the 1860 Census. The shaded squares on the map represent annual production of cotton in each state relative to its size. By Atkinson’s measure, less than 13 percent of the land in the six principal cotton states had even been cultivated, a shocking statistic for a nation taught to fear the economic and political power of slaveholders. Rather than being the country’s agricultural powerhouse, “king” cotton actually constituted just 2 percent of the total acreage of those states. These figures paled in comparison to the amount of land devoted to agricultural production in the Northeast and the Midwest.

This was an utter violation of capitalism, Atkinson argued. Not only had slave labor hampered Southern agriculture, but it had driven away countless potential immigrants. Northern cotton manufacturers had not just the right, but the obligation to demand the introduction of free labor. He proudly noted that free white labor in Tennessee and Texas already produced nearly one-ninth of the region’s cotton output. He even attempted to implement his ideas in late 1863 by supporting the cultivation of cotton with free black labor behind Union lines.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Slavery was a blight on the south and kept it from advancing...while the capitalist North prospered...

So why is socialist North not prospering and capitalist Sun Belt prospering in 2014?

Wage slavery and right to work laws.

ROFLMNAO!

Now isn't that precious?

The Right to Work is a threat to the means to exchange one's labor for that which one needs.

Yet another demonstration of the foreign ideas that are hostile to American principle, on which the Ideological rests. Which explains why:​

​

YOU CAN'T HIDE SOCIALISM!​

​