Defending capitalism

[mollymae]

So here's the deal. Next year, I will be going to college. The majority of students at this school I'm going to happen to be very liberal. This isn't something that's going to bother me a whole lot, but I realize that as a libertarian I'll be somewhat of a minority, and the main thing that will make me a minority is that I will be defending capitalism (I mean just in the context of casual conversation, I'd rather not look like an idiot.) Again, these are the kind of people who think that capitalism is oppressive to the human race and whatnot. I can do just fine in a debate with an intellectual equal, but my biggest concern is being outnumbered. Anyway, my point is, I'm looking for reading materials about defending capitalism to enlighten myself with. Any suggestions are appreciated...

 

[TruthisTreason]

Here are a couple of books I would recommend reading, if you have not already.

 

[mollymae]

Thanks. I'm currently reading Atlas Shrugged, and I'll add the others to the list.

 

[Mini-Me]

My suggestion is to ground yourself in a basic understanding of "common sense economics," and the book Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt provides a good starting point. (After that, if economics really interest you, you might want to bite into a more theoretical and complete economic treatise, e.g. Human Action.)

Beyond economics, it's also crucial to understand the moral hazard that comes with centralized power and especially socialist policies. A great starting point here is Frédéric Bastiat's The Law, a small but powerful book/booklet.

 

[Elwar]

When hanging out with a bunch of hippy friends in college people were bringing up their political affiliations. I told them that I was a libertarian. They were like "that's cool, we need libertarians around to keep things in check every once in a while".

 

[Brett]

Depending on how basic of an understanding you're looking for, I started with "Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell (plus he's a black author, a great talking point to liberals who focus using race as an excuse to hate capitalism). Otherwise I agree with the other books listed above.

 

[TortoiseDream]

So here's the deal. Next year, I will be going to college. The majority of students at this school I'm going to happen to be very liberal. This isn't something that's going to bother me a whole lot, but I realize that as a libertarian I'll be somewhat of a minority, and the main thing that will make me a minority is that I will be defending capitalism (I mean just in the context of casual conversation, I'd rather not look like an idiot.) Again, these are the kind of people who think that capitalism is oppressive to the human race and whatnot. I can do just fine in a debate with an intellectual equal, but my biggest concern is being outnumbered. Anyway, my point is, I'm looking for reading materials about defending capitalism to enlighten myself with. Any suggestions are appreciated...

I always base my arguments around the central idea of capitalism or free markets, which is voluntary contracts. You can't force me to enter into a contract, and I can't force you, and the government (if it exists) can't force anyone either. This applies to all consumer products, labor, investments, everything. To disagree is to say that there is moral justification for forcing someone by violent means to do something they might otherwise not have done. I know how easy it is to get outnumbered, and so my advice is to bring the conversation back to first principles instead of an endless train of "yea buts" or "what ifs" (god that is so annoying).

I've been in college for the three years now, but I'm kind of lucky living in NH lol.

 

[Chaohinon]

I'd suggest handing out some Kevin Carson literature, particularly The Iron Fist Behind The Invisible Hand and The Ethics of Labor Struggle.

Carson has done a lot of excellent work integrating left-wing anti-corporate fervor with free market principles, as the two rightfully belong together. If anyone can speak to the righteous anger that leftists wield against corporate cronyism, while simultaneously encouraging free enterprise, it's him.

Accordingly, the single biggest subsidy to modern corporate capitalism is the subsidy of history, by which capital was originally accumulated in a few hands, and labor was deprived of access to the means of production and forced to sell itself on the buyer's terms. The current system of concentrated capital ownership and large-scale corporate organization is the direct beneficiary of that original structure of power and property ownership, which has perpetuated itself over the centuries.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I'd suggest handing out some Kevin Carson literature, particularly The Iron Fist Behind The Invisible Hand and The Ethics of Labor Struggle.

Carson has done a lot of excellent work integrating left-wing anti-corporate fervor with free market principles, as the two rightfully belong together. If anyone can speak to the righteous anger that leftists wield against corporate cronyism, while simultaneously encouraging free enterprise, it's him.

Economist and anarcho-capitalist Walter Block characterizes Carson as a Marxist, for his embrace of labor value exploitation theory, and argues that Carson's philosophy is full of errors, mostly due to his acceptance of the labor theory of value. "For someone in this day and age to even take this doctrine seriously, let alone actually try to defend it, is equivalent to making a similarly widely and properly rejected position vis à vis the flat earth, or the phlogiston theory. It is, in a word, medieval."[13] Carson replied that Block misrepresents many of his views and probably did not actually read his book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Carson

 

[Chaohinon]

Another critic, Walter Block argues that you are actually some sort of Marxist because you use the labour theory of value for deriving a theory of exploitation. It would seem that (a) Block is unaware that Adam Smith and David Ricardo also used the labour theory of value and (b) using it to calculate a rate of exploitation is hardly the same as using it as an anchor to exchange values.

I think the Austrians also, for the most part, exaggerate the extent to which marginalism/subjectivism is a radical departure from classical labor and cost theories. It's closer to the truth to say that marginalism provides a mechanism for explaining the tendency that Ricardo et al described. The marginalist/subjectivist claim that "utility determines value" is true in a technical sense, if you add the qualification "at any point in time given the snapshot of supply and demand in the spot market." But it's not true in the ordinary way we use those words. If you allow changes in supply over time to enter the picture, then supply alters until the utility of the marginal unit reflects the cost of producing it--i.e., exactly what Ricardo said.

It makes far more sense to treat marginalism as a complement or fulfillment to classical political economy, rather than as supplanting it.

..

 

[RedStripe]

]

Walter Block is a blowhard sometimes.

 

[mollymae]

Thanks for your suggestions and advice.

 

[Goldhunter27]

When hanging out with a bunch of hippy friends in college people were bringing up their political affiliations. I told them that I was a libertarian. They were like "that's cool, we need libertarians around because they probably know where to buy some pot".

fix'd

 

[berrybunches]

I would actually suggest reading up on economic theories that challenge your own views to help you better understand your opponents arguments. This will be useful because you will have a better grasp of their arguments allowing you to debate with better understanding, it will open your mind to different viewpoints, and it may even lead you to question some of your own ideas - which is never a bad thing.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
—Aristotle