Quote Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy View Post
You can quibble over "true" communism never having existed, but then I could say that "true" capitalism never existed either and we can just natter over definitions until the discussion gets bland and pointless.
There's a slight problem with the term "capitalist" too. According to Marx it was the phase of development, somewhere after feudalism and right before the socialist revolution. He basically thought that every facet of society was determined by the distribution of property and the innate desire to aquire more wealth- something that only a socialist overhaul could do away with. So capitalism is a very general, very inclusive concept that would describe basically every industrialised society wich isn't socialist. When people call themselves capitalist they usually mean anti-communist.

I consider myself to be a moderate, leaning towards free market liberalism but wouldn't call myself a capitalist. This is partly because of the reason mentioned above and also because I'm often sceptical of companies myself. Companies are innately opportunistic and they're not above screwing the taxpaying consumers by lobbying for government measures wich are beneficial for them in the short run and disadvantegeous for everyone in the long run- protectionism is a case in point, as are infrastructural projects wich turn out to be useless.

That said, it ticks me off when politicians try to lay the blame on bankers or whoever is the scapegoat of the day for "acting irresponsibly". Some say that just because you can exploit the rules doesn't mean you should. I think that's the wrong approach. You have to assume people will be greedy, that they will exploit the rules if it's beneficial for them and devise the rules starting from that premise. I could start a page long post about wich regulations I think are necessary and wich are a burden, but let's just say that I think of myself as pragmatic rather than dogmatic.