Thread on RWER Blog: Capitalism’s Deniers

Me:  Competition and innovation are economic virtues and both need to be fostered. You can’t have two versions of “THE TRUTH”, but you can have an integration of ONLY the particles of truth in those “TRUTHS”. This thirdness greater oneness is wisdom and should be the mindset of every theorist left or right. The socialist variety need to re-visit Hegel’s dialectic and the capitalist, especially the rigid variety thereof, need to sit down, shut up and CONTEMPLATE the same.

Arrogance and rigidity have never been intellectual virtues, and historically, the various aspects of the unifying and integrative concept of the natural philosophical concept of grace are the route toward intellectual breakthrough.

“I set before you life and death, Therefore, choose life.”

JN:  It seems to me that the comments so far miss the gist of the article. Its key point is that the fundamentalists — along with many economists — treat capitalism as a competitive system BY DEFINITION, and therefore every power aspect of capitalism as NON CAPITALIST to start with. With this assumption, the notion that capitalism, like every other broad social system since antiquity, is a MODE OF POWER, becomes a logical impossibility.

Me:  Not my post. You ARE right that this was the point of the article. All I’ve ever done on here is suggest we come off regurgitating what has already become obvious to heterodox economists and get on with completing the Hegelian dialectic with the insight that the new paradigm is Abundantly Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting and that policies aligned with and crafted around the significances of the micro and macro-economically integrative point of retail sale are the means of making that new paradigm a temporal universe reality.

JN:  To which heterodox economist the notion of “capitalism as a mode of power” has already become obvious?

As far as I can tell, the very notion of an “economy” is already antithetical to that of a mode of power.

But I’m willing to stand corrected.

Me:  My use of heterodox was meant to represent those economists who have at least turned the corner of capitalism (or socialism) as sole thesis, but again you’re right none of them on either side of that oppositional duality has successfully intellectually broken through to the synthesis/thirdness greater oneness that always characterizes a new paradigm….except me, with the profit making economic system of direct and reciprocal monetary distributism….and which with the pinnacle concept of wisdom is able to successfully integrate the two seemingly oppositional aspects of grace, namely benevolence and sovereignty/power.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s