[lbo-talk] True Definition of Capitalism

Jack Stewart jackguy at newsguy.com
Thu Jun 5 18:06:49 PDT 2008


Paul Papadeas wrote:
> Could someone give me a paragraph definition of capitalism? Does one exist and can one simplify what this system does? This is to be more of a modern version in simple language.
>
> Best,
>
> Paul Papadeas
>
>
Do you have a definition of the market? Are you familiar with the Scottish economist Adam Smith and his 1776 book _The Wealth of Nations_?

One constant problem involves the relationship between "capitalism" and Smith's conception of a market economy. He viewed market economies, as existing in tribal societies. ( barter, stone money, cowrie shells etc ) Smith said: "Imagine if you will the whole world a market." However he never used the term capitalism. I tend to view capitalism as a political economy term, but not everybody does. Many people equate a capitalism economy and a market economy.

This is my definition of capitalism from a historical perspective.

HISTORICAL ORIGINS OF THE U.S. POLITICAL ECONOMY Using James Madison's views on the functions and control of government.

THIS IS AS SIMPLE AS IT GETS

After signing the Constitution, Madison worked with John Jay and Alexander Hamilton in writing the Federalist Papers - explaining the Constitution; and attempting to gain support for ratification of it by the states.** **James Madison fully accepted the political regulation of economic and class interests.

The following quote is from James Madison's Federalist Paper #10 -

"A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operation of government."

Wage interests are not mentioned, because, to use the common phrase of the time,/"/people who earn their bread from their employer/"/ did not have the vote. Working white males didn't fully gain the right to vote until around 1830. At the time of the U.S. Constitutional Convention, in 1787, most state governments had property requirements for voting and Madison spoke in favor of requiring one for voting in federal elections. Madison; as well as most members of the Constitutional Convention, believed that the only people who should have a legal authority, (the franchise) to influence the government, (vote for a representative) were property owners. However; members of the convention could not agree on exactly what property requirements should be required, and decided to rely on the states voting requirements to protect their political power. Madison accepted this but worried about the future.

The following quote is from James Madison's personal records of the Constitutional Convention.

"Viewing the subject on its merits alone, the freeholders, (property owners without debt), of the Country would be the safest depositories of Republican liberty. In future times a great majority of the people will not only be without landed, but any other sort of property." [ From Farrand's Records, (MADISON August 7th. In Convention) ]

My guess would be that the U.S. Supreme court tends to be guided by the above historical tradition.

Jack

People without power tend to suffer.

NEW WEB SITE: Political Power in the U.S.: And why you don't have any!

http://tinyurl.com/2sdtvk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list