sanctus Posted November 30, 2004 Report Share Posted November 30, 2004 I just read that the world bank is considering to finance a new project in Laos for constructiong another huge water dam (adding to the ones in China), which is by no means ecological neither socially positive (the world bank itself says that about 40'000 people will lose their basis of survival ). I imagine the reason they give is to help a developping country to become an industrialized and capitalist one, saying that this is the good way. To me all this seems hypocrite, they say that they are interested in the well being of the people of Laos (which maybe-I don't believe it- in long term becomes true), while they want just to assure the presence of enough energy for industries of developped countries for putting their production there (as it is cheaper, there not many ecological controls and laws...). What do you think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aki Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Well I guess it's a win-win situation, the construction of the dam will give many people of Laos a job, while the world bank get what they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted December 1, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Yes it's a win-win situation for the rich, as they are the only ones who had the change to study and be qualified enough for the "new jobs". The poor they are deplaced, have to leave their village, find a new basis of existence; that means they become poorer.If you cal this a win-win situation,I call it a rich-poor gap widening situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 but thats what capitalism is all about, the elimination of the middle class... the rich get richer as the poor get poorer, thats why the system stinks so much, really, there a wonderful description of capitalism in action by Marks in the beginning of Das Capital. This is the same problem with software patents, allowing big corporations to patent code and noone else can use it without their permission eliminating all the little inovative companies, and making the regular programmers slaves who have to pay to do what they do the best... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Yes this is a pefect example of Capitalism at it's highest level. After all the source is a BANK. Banks are in the biz of lending money. Poor people can't get the loans, so naturally any research they do is aimed at justifying things that will give them the chance to laon money to the wealthy. So what if a few tens of thousands lose their homes? They didn't ahve morgages on them, why would the bank care? Ecology? Birds don't borrow money! Win Win? Yes the Banks win and big biz wins. Screw the little guy. What value is he? I think the G Bush election theft (again) is bad news for the world in each of these cases. Big Biz is running the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Big Biz wants to run the world, it gains more power, but sometimes is held back by some of the little guys that have some power to fight... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted December 2, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2004 Don't you believe in the possibility of a social capitalism? An example of this is a swiss bank called "Alternative Bank", they do all the capitalistic stuff, i.e investing money and so on, but they invest only in socially and ecologically acceptable things. P.S.: Alexander, it should be "Das Kapital" with k :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted December 3, 2004 Report Share Posted December 3, 2004 Don't you believe in the possibility of a social capitalism? I do believe in "oxymorons". :wink: An example of this is a swiss bank called "Alternative Bank", they do all the capitalistic stuff, i.e investing money and so on, but they invest only in socially and ecologically acceptable things. Yeah...and who gets to decide what's acceptable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted December 3, 2004 Report Share Posted December 3, 2004 P.S.: Alexander, it should be "Das Kapital" with k :wink: And MarX. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted December 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 What are oxymorons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexander Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 "An oxymoron (plural "oxymorons" or "oxymora") is a short phrase that appears self-contradictory. Oxymoron is a Greek term which can be translated literally as "sharp-witted absurdity". The oxymorons are a proper subset of the expressions called contradiction in terms. What distinguishes oxymorons from other contradictions is that they are used intentionally, for rhetorical effect, and the contradiction is only apparent." as defined by wiki...I do believe in "oxymorons". :wink: [/Quote] I think Tormod was just being sorcastic... I also think that that means that he thinks that socialism and capitalism are opposites and could not coexist (thus you using them together in as "social capitalism" makes it (the phrase) an oxymoron). I agree with Tormod though, it's impossible for the society as it is today live in real capitalism... And BTW its Das Capital by Marks if you are already 7 minutes late to class... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted December 7, 2004 Report Share Posted December 7, 2004 I think Tormod was just being sorcastic... I also think that that means that he thinks that socialism and capitalism are opposites and could not coexist (thus you using them together in as "social capitalism" makes it (the phrase) an oxymoron). Correct. Socialism is one thing, capitalism another, so the term "social capitalism" would be more apt to describe a capitalist policy which is based on sutainability for the community as a whole. Which I think is rather the opposite of what a capitalist nation can do. Either you have one or the other. Old "socialist" countries (like Norway and Sweden) have never been socialist countries at all (they call it social democracy these days for some reason) but I think we can safely label them Capitalist today. And BTW its Das Capital by Marks if you are already 7 minutes late to class... LOL. "More Cash" by Marks&Spencer perhaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.