Laissez-Faire Capitalism is the Only Moral System

[Munro Williams]

I live in a national socialist state (Japan) where the ideas of individualism and market economics make people's palms sweat. Things are pretty shabby, hot water is a luxury, and apples cost about $5.00 each. I have actually seen watermelons for sale for $1,600.00 a piece. Other examples abound.


The laws of supply and demand do not apply over here.

For those interested, the link below will explain why the free market is the only moral system:
http://www.capitalism.org/capitalism/tour/index.htm




[This message has been edited by Munro Williams (edited June 13, 2000).]

 

[Battler]

I pray (no offense if you're not) that you've US citizenship and are only there for a job or something (i.e. have the choice to leave before you lose your lunch).

If not - well, bummer - Japan could use a lot more who think the way you do.


A hard thing to swallow when one is exposed to capitalism/objectivism is the gloom of knowing that you will not live free or in a free country in your lifetime (USA included) - along with the social ostracization of your "extreme" views. I know a guy who abandoned objectivism for this popularity reason - I guess he coerced himself to believe some conflicting things to flee the anguish.


I've spotted you posting your "capitalist rhetoric" Keep it up - I get it but lack the skills necessary to communicate to others. Even us pro-gun people need straightening out, although because we understand freedom better than many other groups this is a more fertile ground for truth.


In Japan's defense however, isn't that situation due to Japan's lack of resources? Of course, the socialism hits the imports hard, and I guess stuff like food is imports


Battler.

 

[Munro Williams]

Battler,

Japanese banking law was enacted in 1943.
It's a copy of the National Socialist Reichsbank Act of 1942. It was strengthened in 1947 with American approval.

I could easily fill up this thread with about a zillion reasons why Japan is the way it is, but it would bore people to tears.

BTW, I am an American, extremely thankful and damned proud of it.

If you get a chance, check out posts from ellsworthtoohey. Haven't heard from in a while, though.

[This message has been edited by Munro Williams (edited June 14, 2000).]

 

[Hal]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Munro Williams:
I live in a national socialist state (Japan) where the ideas of individualism and market economics make people's palms sweat. Things are pretty shabby, hot water is a luxury, and apples cost about $5.00 each. I have actually seen watermelons for sale for $1,600.00 a piece. Other examples abound.
<SNIP>[/quote]


I know it isn't central to the post, but the concept of killing the individual in spirit is one of the most dangerous themes introduced by the Japanese into American thinking. If you look at US history, legend and story, it has always been the strength of the individual to overcome even when faced with overwhelming odds. Even in defeat, in a case like Custer, it's the individual that is promoted, and not *the team*. We still have our Jordans, but they are overshadowed by "The Dream Team" when presented to the rest of the world. Sorry I can't cite the source, but the concept isn't mine. I read a number of years ago that the effect was started post WWII by the cheap labor available in Japan. Cartoons were very labor intensive to produce with American studio personell, so the studios began to send the grunt work to Japan. End result is the killed off Popeye in favor of the Power Rangers. Gone in the minds of kids is the kick a$$ guy that takes on all comers, and replaced with the group that vanquisishes the single bad guy. It's a rare form of entertainment these days that promotes a single hero above the team.

 

[Battler]

It surprises me that the US conquers countries, has complete power over them (i.e. can throw out Nazi party) yet does not install similar govt. as it has. It's as through the US sees its constitution as a disease (at least the 2nd amendment) that it has to endure but given the choice they'd want something like Japan's or Germany's.


just a thought,
Battler.

 

[Hutch]

I didn't know whether to post here, or in response to Amp's comments regarding socialism. Here it goes...

We in this country have been fed a bill of goods regarding the "rights" we posess. The only real rights we have come to us from God. These are the real McCoy. Please, spare us the use of the term "Patient's Bill of Rights". The very use of the term rights to describe this whining snivelling demeans the term. We have NO "right" to a job, food, shelter, health care, medicine, or any other such accomodation. These things do not come to us by virtue of having been born. Our rights do. Food, healthcare etc. must be PURCHASED. To demand them without paying for them mean we ENSLAVE those who must provide them for us. We have NO CLAIM on others to demand that we be provided with these things.

That being said, it is proper that those of us who have make provision for those who are physically unable to provide for themselves. This is called charity, and it enobles the giver, unlike taxes, which steal from the payer. Furthermore, to provide to those who are physically able to work robs them of their self esteem and a sense of worth. This produces people who are disposed to violence and crime. This becomes a self-perpetuating spiral downward, the effects of which are plain to see.

 

[Munro Williams]

Battler,

Technically, we never conquered Japan. We destroyed the Imperial Japanese Army. Sure, there was some land reform, State Shinto and Emperor worship were prohibited, women got the vote, but the Emperor, the Hino-Maru (meatball) flag, and everything else was retained. There's an old Japanese saying:
"The winning shogun is the Emperor's shogun."
In its fundamental form, the Meiji system of 1868 remains in place. Even as the surrender document was being signed on the Missouri, Japan continued to be administered by her own bureaucrats.

Hutch:
Nice words on Natural Rights! All the rest are counterfeit rights, and do the same thing to Natural Rights that counterfeit money does to real money.

Rights are the most precious things we have.
It peeves me, to use a mild word, to see what the debasing of our political currency has done.

[This message has been edited by Munro Williams (edited June 14, 2000).]

 

[fairln]

I am extremely surprised to see such an outstanding series of posts on a board dedicated primarily to guns. Indeed, Individuality, Laissez-Faire Capitalism and protection of individual rights as opposed to what passes itself off as rights these are the central issue in the contest to be free.

The only thing I have found to say in reply is that, whether or not God exists, rights are based in the nature of Man as a rational being. For Man to survive and succeed, he has to be left free to make choices. Any system that prevents this, while possibly not condemning him to death, will certainly lead to a reduction in the quality of his existence and the existence of all those around him i.e., your money or your life at gun point is not a choice, it is an destroying of choice. So is your gun or your life at point of government force. If God had a hand in this, then it was to set us up so there is no other proper way for us to live.

 

[C.R.Sam]

Even back to Blackstone's Commentaries, rights are not given or granted by governments. Rather; governments can only take away rights. Blackstone had a lot to say about the right of free men to be armed to defend themselves against tyrany.

Sam

 

[Battler]

Hmm. . . . modern conquerers have usually left the institutions intact. Although the Germans didn't get to keep on being Nazis (to this day I believe their domestic govt. has limits). And the Nazis left some French in charge (obviously sympathetic ones).

I would argue with the fact that Japan was conquered - they surrendured unconditionally, the US had the choice of installing Winnie the Pooh the head of state if they wanted. They chose, like many other winners/conquerers, it was most efficient/fair/whatever to leave many of the current institutions in place, cutting out only the elements they found most offensive about their existence, (e.g. a superpower military, or in the case of the Nazis cutting out the goose-stepping moron element).

Battler.

 

[Shin-Tao]

Capitalism is under attack constantly. I wonder why the big megacorps and multinationals don't put up more of a fight. It doesn't take that much of a campaign contribution to buy a politician.

 

[Munro Williams]

Battler,

Obviously we occupied the country and Japan is a much different place. But technically there was no break in the administration.

BTW, the term Thought Police comes from Japan. Before the war there was a special police unit called the Tokubetsu Koto Keisatsu, abbreviated to tokko, colloquially known as "thought police." Their job was to round up Shiso Hannin, literally "thought criminals." Their mission was Shiso Zendo, literally "thought control."

Guess who eluded the Americans and surfaced in the Ministries of Justice, Education, Labor, National Police Agency and other social-political nerve centers after the occupation ended? Yep, your friendly neighborhood thought policemen.

Of course, about 95% of the Japanese people have absolutely no idea about this, and the other five percent are divided into fascists or Marxists.

Yep, I'm really SAFER for not being able to own a gun!

There's a book called The Enigma of Japanese Power, by Karel Van Wolferen, which goes into these things in more detail. It covers politics, economics, ideology, and general social trends better than anything I've ever read on the subject.

Check it out. Dense, but interesting reading.

 

[Ampersand]

Hutch:

I think we have the rights that we as a society democratically choose to give each other, plus (but not limited to) those rights that are set out in our constitution.

Since there's widespread disagreement on what God believes and since He (She?) hasn't come forward in a definitive way to settle the matter, I don't think talking about what rights God gives us is very productive.

You may talk about God-given rights, but all the really means is the rights the mortal, fallible human being named Hutch chooses to believe come courtesy of God. In the end, it still comes down to democracy: if you (and like-minded others) can convince enough of your fellow citizens to vote for legislators that respect these allegedly "God-given" rights, then they will continue to be important elements of our society.

If you (and others) can't, then they won't. And if the history of atrocities around the world is anything to judge by, God won't do a thing to restore the "God-given" rights, either.

--Amp

[This message has been edited by Ampersand (edited June 16, 2000).]

 

[Shin-Tao]

Amp.

The USA is not, and never has been, a Democracy.

PS.

Do you even own any firearms?

 

[deanf]

Without the artificial, administrative creations of man (ie: government) doesn't every human have the "right" to do whatever they want?

Given that, isn't the only function of government in the area of "rights" to restrict them?

------------------
"Anyone feel like saluting the flag which the strutting ATF and FBI gleefully raised over the smoldering crematorium of Waco, back in April of ‘93?" -Vin Suprynowicz

 

[Ampersand]

Shin-Tao: Sorry, I should have said republic.

Deanf wrote: Without the artificial, administrative creations of man (ie: government) doesn't every human have the "right" to do whatever they want?

No; even in a state of anarchy, my "right" to do whatever I want may be abridged by anyone else who has more power. i.e., my right to keep ownership of a Calvin and Hobbes book could be taken away at any moment by a bigger, stronger Calvin and Hobbes fan (assuming I don't have a gun on me, that is).

Rights can easily be trampled upon with or without governments.

Given that, isn't the only function of government in the area of "rights" to restrict them?

No, governments both restrict and protect rights. I can think of many instances of both.

--Amp

 

[The Beez]

RAE said:
Gone in the minds of kids is the kick a$$ guy that takes on all comers, and replaced with the group that vanquisishes the single bad guy. It's a rare form of entertainment these days that promotes a single hero above the team.
*****

Interestingly, there may be some cross-pollination going on here. I'll bet everyone here has heard of Pokemon. What many may not be aware of is the extent to which the story focuses on a lead character, Ash: a boy who dreams of becoming a full-fledged Pokemon Master. You get there by training Pokemon you find and putting them through competitive battles. The stories usually portray Ash as a kid with an indomitable spirit who overcomes sometimes incredible odds mainly through the force of a fiercely individualistic spirit.

There are many examples of lone-hero against oppressive or corrupt society themes in Japanese cartoons, both the animated and printed kind. I recommend "Lone Wolf and Cub," a comic book series which has been translated into English, and has had a couple of live-action movies made based on the story and characters.

-- The Beez

 

[Hutch]

Thanks for the riposte, Amp. Let me try to counter your argument. Whether rights come from God, or are innate (sp?) as a result of our being born makes no difference. The point is that they are not conveyed to us my a super-ordinate entity, such as society, least of all by a collective wish as expressed democratically. Time for me to sign off tonight. I'll try to expand on this a little later in the week.

 

[Munro Williams]

Beez,

There's a tremendous amount of false individualism over here. I know the same thing happens in the States, but over here a difference in degree is a difference in kind.
For example the Imperial Japanese Navy pilots' favorite movie was "Hell Divers" starring Clark Gable, thus, the Naval pilots who stomped us at Pearl Harbor were nicknamed "Helldivers."

Every Japanese is an individual, but the social pressure on that individual is beyond your imagination. I'll stop 'cause I can really drone on and on about this.... :boring:

[This message has been edited by Munro Williams (edited June 19, 2000).]

 

[Hutch]

Amp, I must let the others on the "Hardy Weed (2)" thread carry the cudgel for now. I have little more to offer, except to say that everyone, by virtue of being born, has inalienable rights as outlined broadly in the Constitution. These may not be taken away. There are cases in which these rights are not observed, or secured by our Government (gun ownership in DC comes to mind), but they do repose IN THE INDIVIDUAL as a birthright. The "right" to be free from want implies that, by virtue of being born, a person has a claim on the wealth of everyone else. This is a form of SLAVERY, when the economic output of the individual belongs to someone else. I really wish I had the gift of communicating this burning conviction well enough to be a successful advocate of this position. I look forward to reading the discussion on this and other threads.