As usual, Barry is trying to force people into the few molds he sees. The limited choices are either “good guy” (agrees with Barry’s belierfs) or bad guy (believes anything else).
I’m sure there are at least a dozen other choices that could be listed so that responders would have one that more closely matched their views.
I see Capitalism as the only economic system that makes sense for the foreseeable future. However, it MUST be strongly controlled by laws instituted by the political system.
No no no Occam, I am not trying to tell people what they ought to think to fit my mold of a future economics. I emphasized humanism over atheism because the person who voted for the neo-liberal unrestricted capitalism (assuming he/she knows what that actualy is and what it would do to society (and is doing to a large degree today) can hardly be a humanist. This is not controversal Occam - except for those who think humanism is the same thing as atheism or scientific naturalism or merely a human-centered philsophy (with some vague ideas about morals or ethics). Any atheist, naturalist or skeptic on these forums may prefer this sort of economics, but since it would (and does) naturally lead to gross inequities, a humanist can’t.
As for the other choices not listed in the poll I set up, the program did not let me add more than three no matter what I did. It kept on deleting any additions I typed after three. I do not know if this is my computer problem or a problem with the site. Nevertheless, I did not add the other “tried” systems because most of us already agree that Communism, State Socialism, Feudalism, Barter, etc. have not worked and can’t be humanistic. Other ideas such as LETS, TimesBank, Open Money, etc. are not fully systemic systems as of yet, so they need to be passed by for such a poll (though perhaps their advocated might dissagree).
What is really debated on these forums (and in the West) concerns capitalism. Shall we have the American Libertarian truely free market capitalism either conservatives like Milton Freidman advocate for, or a sort of free-market anarchism or anarcho-capitalism some radicals talk about.
Or, should we have a government regulated “New Deal” or Keynesian capitalism? These can more easily lead to fascism then the other three systems, by the way and is doing so today.
Or should we move beyond market capitalism alltogether as the Social Democrats pre-WWII and their Libertarian Socialist brothers and sisters wanted?
I think the first is anti-humanistic. I think the second is humanistic in that it “humanizes” market capitalism (less so the New Deal than Keynesianism); but that is like treating the symptoms of the disease rather than the disease itself. And anyone who does not think market capitalism is a social disease does not know the facts about market capitalism (and what it does to people all over the planet), or has a very Hobbesian outlook on humankind and doesn’t think we can be less greedy and competitive.
Yes, clearly I am advocating for what I am because it is the only way left (I know of) where real economic justice and economic democracy can thrive. This is based on the facts of history and the facts of today. If anyone on this forum has an idea of a way which is not any of the above, but can prove to be about real equality, self-management, cooperation and all those other humanistic morals we lay claim to when calling ourselves humanists - like Parecon or Inclusive Democracy can - I would love to learn about it!
In the meantime, it is clear that neo-liberal Free Market Capitalism is anti-humanistic, social democracy via the New Deal was really not very democratic and embraced market capitalism way too fully, and social democracy as in Sweden and Norway lost its way when Keyne’s work became the ends rather than social democrat’s original means (based on reaching an ends… being the end of market capitalism itself)...
If anyone feels differently, it seems to be the burdon of proof is on them as an objective and clear-headed look at history seems to back what I have said on these forums. Tell me what a real social democracy looks like, and how it can lead to long-term equitablity for all persons? Better yet, tell me how neo-liberal free market capitalism can do this?