David Simon: 'There are now two Americas. My country is a horror show'

jpx7

jpx7

Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
So, this is about a month old, but I just got around to reading it, and I think it's fairly perspicacious:

Mistaking capitalism for a blueprint as to how to build a society strikes me as a really dangerous idea in a bad way. Capitalism is a remarkable engine again for producing wealth. It's a great tool to have in your toolbox if you're trying to build a society and have that society advance. You wouldn't want to go forward at this point without it. But it's not a blueprint for how to build the just society. There are other metrics besides that quarterly profit report.

The idea that the market will solve such things as environmental concerns, as our racial divides, as our class distinctions, our problems with educating and incorporating one generation of workers into the economy after the other when that economy is changing; the idea that the market is going to heed all of the human concerns and still maximise profit is juvenile. It's a juvenile notion and it's still being argued in my country passionately and we're going down the tubes. And it terrifies me because I'm astonished at how comfortable we are in absolving ourselves of what is basically a moral choice. Are we all in this together or are we all not?

[...]

So I'm astonished that at this late date I'm standing here and saying we might want to go back for this guy Marx that we were laughing at, if not for his prescriptions, then at least for his depiction of what is possible if you don't mitigate the authority of capitalism, if you don't embrace some other values for human endeavour.

[...]

So how does it get better? In 1932, it got better because they dealt the cards again and there was a communal logic that said nobody's going to get left behind. We're going to figure this out. We're going to get the banks open. From the depths of that depression a social compact was made between worker, between labour and capital that actually allowed people to have some hope.

We're either going to do that in some practical way when things get bad enough or we're going to keep going the way we're going, at which point there's going to be enough people standing on the outside of this mess that somebody's going to pick up a brick, because you know when people get to the end there's always the brick. I hope we go for the first option but I'm losing faith.

The other thing that was there in 1932 that isn't there now is that some element of the popular will could be expressed through the electoral process in my country.

The last job of capitalism – having won all the battles against labour, having acquired the ultimate authority, almost the ultimate moral authority over what's a good idea or what's not, or what's valued and what's not – the last journey for capital in my country has been to buy the electoral process, the one venue for reform that remained to Americans.
Click to expand...
 
We are a capitalist country but we have been moving towards a socialist country as far back as the New Deal. Its really inevitable. What we really dont have is a free society. Just because we get to choose between 2 masters every 4 years doesnt make us free.
 
jpx7 said:
So, this is about a month old, but I just got around to reading it, and I think it's fairly perspicacious:
Click to expand...

We hear this thing about two Americas all the time. It's highly overstated. Most Americans want the perfect balance between socialism and capitalism. We've been trending that way for a long time now. Sure we have wall street but at the same time we have social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment, foodstamps, etc.

Honestly only the economic libertarians seek a true capitalistic society and they are a pretty extreme minority.
 
weso1 said:
Most Americans want the perfect balance between socialism and capitalism. We've been trending that way for a long time now. Sure we have wall street but at the same time we have social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment, foodstamps, etc.
Click to expand...

you fishing or being serious?
 
Yes, despite what they may say most Americans want a balance between socialism and capitalism. And that's what we have now. We're continuously trending toward that perfect balance, if it exists. You don't think we have a mix right now? The federal social programs we have are behemoth programs. Liberals came up with what I think are good ideas in social security and medicare, the republicans provide the conservative balance to hopefully keep those programs available.
 
I don't call minimal social nets and crony capitalism a blend of socialism and capitalism but more like dabbling in the 2.
 
The other thing that was there in 1932 that isn't there now is that some element of the popular will could be expressed through the electoral process in my country.

The last job of capitalism – having won all the battles against labour, having acquired the ultimate authority, almost the ultimate moral authority over what's a good idea or what's not, or what's valued and what's not – the last journey for capital in my country has been to buy the electoral process, the one venue for reform that remained to Americans.
Click to expand...

I cannot emphasize this bit enough.

I'm not much given to O tempora! O mores!, but I feel like Citizens United broke something important and meaningful about America, damaged though it may have already been. It was the last nail in a coffin that had been under construction for decades. What he's talking about here should be terrifying to everyone, but some folks think that billions of dollars worth of anonymous money being dumped into each election is not something to fear.
 
cajunrevenge said:
We are a capitalist country but we have been moving towards a socialist country as far back as the New Deal. Its really inevitable. What we really dont have is a free society. Just because we get to choose between 2 masters every 4 years doesnt make us free.
Click to expand...

Can you give me an example, either contemporary or historical, of a free society?
 
sturg33 said:
If you think we're in a capitalistic country, you aren't paying attention
Click to expand...

Can you give me an example, either contemporary or historical, of a "capitalistic country?"

This is not the first time I've asked you this question.
 
sturg33 said:
Whether I can or can't is irrelevant. What is relevant is that we are not.
Click to expand...

So you can't define pornography, but you know it when you see it, huh?

So what is a "capitalistic country?"

It's been relevant the other times I've asked. You're always singing a tune about liberty, freedom, and free markets . . . can you just give me one example of a state that has now, or has ever, enjoyed those things in a proportion that you approve of?
 
Julio3000 said:
So you can't define pornography, but you know it when you see it, huh?

So what is a "capitalistic country?"

It's been relevant the other times I've asked. You're always singing a tune about liberty, freedom, and free markets . . . can you just give me one example of a state that has now, or has ever, enjoyed those things in a proportion that you approve of?
Click to expand...

All I said was, we're not a capitalistic country. Blaming our problems on capitalism is dumb.

I would say we were doing it pretty well up until the early 1900's.
 
sturg33 said:
All I said was, we're not a capitalistic country. Blaming our problems on capitalism is dumb.

I would say we were doing it pretty well up until the early 1900's.
Click to expand...

We enjoyed quite a number of freedoms then . . . the freedom to die in a locked sweatshop, for example, or the freedom to be discriminated against by age, race, or gender; or to not have to wait until you were a grownup to get silicosis.
coal_zps4badaa21.gif
 
Julio3000 said:
We enjoyed quite a number of freedoms then . . .
Click to expand...

Don't forget: for most of that "until the early 1900's" period, many in this country also enjoyed the sweet freedoms of chattel* existence.

*Cool etymological note: chattel < Old French chatel, chetel (Old Northern French catel, Provençal captal, capdal) < late Latin captāle, Latin capitāle principal, property, goods, etc.
 
jpx7 said:
Don't forget: for most of that "until the early 1900's" period, many in this country also enjoyed the sweet freedoms of chattel* existence.

*Cool etymological note: chattel < Old French chatel, chetel (Old Northern French catel, Provençal captal, capdal) < late Latin captāle, Latin capitāle principal, property, goods, etc.
Click to expand...

Kept labor costs in check right nicely.
 
weso1 said:
Hmm... maybe you and sturg should post some examples itt so we can try to figure out the definition.
Click to expand...

I'd have thought the picture I posted was pornography to Sturg—no meddlesome government regulations artificially inflating the cost of labor, and whatnot.

Those kids made a legal contract with the mine as to the price of their labor. No safety regulations, no NLRB—sounds like exactly what he meant when he said we were doing pretty well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top