Comments by "MarcosElMalo2" (@MarcosElMalo2) on "Zeihan on Geopolitics"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@alexandersims1613 I don’t know if I agree with your solutions, but you made an important point. The economy is a machine. More specifically, it is an engine. You are proposing making adjustments to the engine.
When we have this common framework, that the economy is an engine, we have a basis for debating policy, i.e., how to make adjustments, improvements, and tweaks to the engine. We also have a framework for a more fundamental debate: to what purpose are we using the engine? Are we moving ourselves forward with the engine? Or do only a tiny percentage of us get a luxury ride while the rest of us must walk?
Capitalism is a social technology (an engine) that propels this vehicle we call society. Once we decide the purpose of the vehicle (should it carry the bulk of us or only a chosen few? Do we care if people get left behind? Do we want a race car, a luxury sedan, or a bus?), we can then make the adjustments to the engine that would best serve our purpose.
And now we can have our economic policy debate, and we can base our arguments on historical fact and experimental data rather than emotion and quasi-religious dogma (capitalism is NOT a religion), etc. We can debate where we are going and how to get there.
Anyway, I think you’ve found a good mode of thinking, a conceptual model that most people can understand. It’s a good analogy. The economy IS a machine, and machines are tools that we use to do work. Machines should serve us. Anyone who suggests we should serve the machine, who is turning capitalism into a religion, is trying to create a dogma to conceal their real intentions.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kucanusa3750 Are you also an outsider to the concept of human rights?
I’m sorry that sounds harsh. I understand what you are saying and I sympathize with your reaction. But do you think that due process should be a universal right or only for people in the U.S.? Also, locking people in a cage without food or light is by itself cruel and unusual punishment, but it is even worse if you’re doing it so they kill each other.
There is also a historical backdrop to this story, the civil war of the 70s and 80s, in which the government performed extrajudicial killings of dissidents, journalists, and priests. The military was sent out to the countryside where they murdered entire villages on the pretext that they were rebels. (And for additional background, the U.S. was providing arms and training to the Salvadoran military at this time.)
I don’t think that the narco gangs are freedom fighters, and I don’t equate drug trafficking with communism (although both are bad). So it’s not an exact comparison. But do you see how the brutal excesses of one war might be repeated in this war against drug traffickers? Without sufficient human rights being enforced, legal rights we enjoy in the U.S., such excesses are almost guaranteed.
Ultimately your initial reaction is emotional. It’s understandable why someone would feel that way. But I hope that given time to reflect, perhaps with new information, you’ll temper your emotions with a more compressive sense of Justice for All.
Now, I think you can make an effective counter argument if you wish, because the problem doesn’t have clear cut solutions. Go for it if you’d like, but if you don’t have time or inclination, I understand. I don’t claim to be 100% right with my position.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2