Capitalism: Is it Working?

[Mister Agenda]

You have a very narrow and wrong perception of history.

Do tell.

200 years ago, the industrial revolution was in it`s beginnings.

That's not a coincidence.

Forcing hundreds of thousands (including children) to work under miserable working conditions in factories and mines, for 6 days a week, for low wages.

The 'force' was, though it was still a pittance, the pay was more than workers could get in agriculture. People didn't flock to factories because back on the farm was better. They weren't dragged from their homes and forced to toil in factories. They showed up looking for work. It's a shame that they couldn't do better, but the first step up from extreme poverty is still pretty damn impoverished and desperate.

Whilest their rights were literaly trampled uppon. Additionaly to that, in it`s early days, capitalism also helped such wonderfully humane things as slavery, to reach a level it had never been on before.

I agree, the process of capitalism increases efficiency whether your goals are benign, selfish, or evil. It's a system of economics, not a system of ethics. It is measured against other economic systems by how well it works. The ethics have to be supplied by the participants, just as in any other economic system.

It was through the rise of the workers rights movements during the 1840s - 1880s that workers gained a chance to achieve the wealth and security which they were denied.

And by that time, the wealth and security they wanted actually existed, thanks to decades of strong economic growth. The same movements in the infancy of the industrial revolution would have shut down the factories.

These movements were the direct result of the then dominant culture of opression through miserable working conditions and minimal goverment intervention, and not the result of naiv ideas of creating a better society.

If you think I am against workers movements, or for miserable working conditions, you are misunderstanding me. I'm merely being realistic. In an environment where extreme poverty is the norm, you can't magically skip the part of development where pay is low and conditions are poor. You CAN shorten that part with investment from already-developed countries and you CAN mitigate violation of rights with good laws, transparency and economic incentives. I'm not for sweat shops, but the way to get rid of them isn't to close them down and put their employees out of work. It's to make them obsolete as fast as possible, and that takes more effort than being picky about where you buy your t-shirts.

One can easily say that the 19th century with it`s complete ignorance towards the working classes and policies of minimal goverment intervention was a liberterians wet dream.

Given how the government then had its cheeks spread for the land barons, I would say it was a better example of soft fascism. The government in the 19th century apparently saw its role as giving away land and other special privileges to the companies headed by those most adept at bribery. Not so different from today. Libertarians tend not to be big fans of consumerism or corporatism or crony capitalism; all of which are detrimental to a free market. As long as politicians are in a position to grant corporations special favors, corporations will find a way to get away with influencing the tax code and having a hand in writing the regulations that govern them to the detriment of their less well-connected competitors.