Dear f/w friends
Time, perhaps for a next step in this.
My guess might be that few of us see capitalism as *the* last word in social
and global management ('That which has a start also has an end' and so on.)
I think, that, if we are to have any chance of defining a better system (at
least one, practically, that we could get to within our? life-times!), then
defining 'where we are now' is one fair place to start.
Ok, Ok, I accept that defining tangibles and intangibles is a slippery task.
tho' key to that is to try to untangle cause from effects (Dilbert:
"Capitalism; The harder I work, the fatter my boss becomes." - a description
of cansequences rather than cause - this definition is equally true of other
heirarchy-based systems!)
Hence I accept, full well, that the operational level of definition that I
took from the Oxford Dictionary ("Private ownership of the means of
production and their use for private profit' - I paraphrase a bit) is a
start only, but this will get us along.)
(Consider, for example, the fact that the above has an 'ethical' component
behind it - that ownership of anything is realistically possible,which we
could challenge, *but* let's leave that to one side for while.)
So, the OD definition leads to the start of the following start to a table
of possibilities:
Economic system Ownership of productive assets Ownership of benefits
Capitalism Private Private
Communism Public Public
(Theoretical?)
OK, f/w friends, any others?
Hugs
john
***********
