Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Has modern Capitalism mutated into totalitarianism?
Capitalism is promoted on the premise that competing self-interests, regulated by the realities of "the market", work for the general benefit of human society. However, if the modern pillars of Capitalism - the banks, the stock markets, global corporations - are so powerful that political institutions will take "any action necessary" to prevent these pillars from falling, then the market cannot perform its essential function. Such a dysfunctional market means we do not have capitalism, but possibly something akin to an oligopoly - a very unhealthy and dangerous state of affairs where immense power is concentrated in a relatively small, but completely unaccountable group interested only in perpetuating and extending its own power. Not unlike the totalitarian Eastern European states of recent history.
What is to be done?
7 Answers
- Kilroy RobotoLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
Very insightful of you.
I believe the mutation began with Reaganomics. Until his "trickle down" economics was instituted, there was a balance between corporate and worker interests. There was a systematic attack against organized labor which resulted in a impotent work force. The imbalance of power has allowed the economic gap between the rich and poor to widen at astounding rates.
They have us right where they want us.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
If these institutions had failed without any government intrusion into the market or government policies or enterprises that distorted the risks, then perhaps it could be seen that way.
But that's not the case. The fact is that government policies that forced institutions to take risks they normally wouldn't, and then use government institutions and policies to attempt to mitigate that risk, only led to the creation of a huge weak structure that was bound to fall.
Perhaps if government instead didn't interfere in the market, imposing upon financial institutions to become instruments of the politicians' social policies, we wouldn't have had such a mess. The market wasn't allowed to freely perform its essential function.
It is the intrusion of government into the market that creates problems.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Good question....
The gov getting involved to save these companies is in Direct contradiction of the meaning of Capitalism. The problem with Capitalism is greed & greed is what makes capitalism work....
What is to be done, is for our gov & citizens to realize that we can't have a 100% capitalist society. Greed is to powerful... it will led to that what we have now. There has to be regulation & oversight to limit power and regulate the intent of companies actions.
Ex. Washington Mutual & Wachovia investing a large portion of there wealth in the risky forms of loans... to the extent that Washington Mutual became insolvent....
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Yes. Greedy politicans, companies, one-sided media, propaganda, etc. That is all Totaltarianism. Pure Capitalism is when there are multiple parties, news networks that are actually neutral, and most importantly no more greedy CEOs or bankers. Ever since they took away our gold standard our country has been in slavery because of debt.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- John MLv 71 decade ago
Seems like its heading toward feudalism to me. I think what is to be done is to elect democrats who will work to restore the balance between business owners and workers, between wealthy corporate interests and small business and the citizen.
- anonacoupLv 71 decade ago
We have to reform corporations and corporate law. We have given these entities too much power without moral responsibility.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
No but liberalism has.