Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Are Economics And Political Systems Inter-related?

Rate this topic


Michelangelo

Recommended Posts

I was told that political and economic systems are COMPLETELY seperate--having nothing to do with each other. This doesn't seem to make sense because economic freedom can either be restricted or left alone by government.

What did Ayn Rand have to say about the relation between these two systems?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends on exactly what the person meant by 'economic and political systems'. If he is claiming that theres no relation between government and economics then that's nonsense, for the reasons he mentioned. However, he could mean either of the 2 following claims, which more accurate:

a) The structure of government is unrelated to the economics of the society (for instance, the same laissez faire system could be governed by a democratically elected group, or by a 'benevolent dictator').

B) Economics as a science should be 'value-free' and studied with no reference to political philosophy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was told that political and economic systems are COMPLETELY seperate--having nothing to do with each other.  This doesn't seem to make sense because economic freedom can either be restricted or left alone by government. 

What did Ayn Rand have to say about the relation between these two systems?

"Economic system" refers to a specific aspect of a political system, the part that pertains to production of wealth. The right to criticise the government, for example is a not an economical question, but it is a political one. The right to sell beer is an economic one. The concepts are in the genus / species relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree more or less with what others have written, but there is a further point: why do some people maintain a dichotomy between the political realm and the economic realm? In the most fundamental sense, the answer is because they are proponents of the mind-body dichotomy.

Whether they endorse government control of the economic realm (as the liberals do), or the political realm (as the conservatives do), the relevant point is that they view the realms as essentially different. But they are not. Man is an integrated being, mind and body. If you attempt to control half of him, you destroy him totally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree more or less with what others have written, but there is a further point: why do some people maintain a dichotomy between the political realm and the economic realm?  In the most fundamental sense, the answer is because they are proponents of the mind-body dichotomy.

What does the seperation of economics from politics (right or wrong) have to do with the 'mind-body dichotomy'? You cant just say that anyone who thinks 2 related spheres should be seperate is a proponent of the mind-body split without engaging in gross psychologizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what DPW is talking about (if I understand him correctly) is the supposed distinction between economic rights/liberties and civil rights/liberties. That distinction is a result of the mind-body dichotomy. It shouldn't be confused with the separation of economy and state under a laissez faire system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does the seperation of economics from politics (right or wrong) have to do with the 'mind-body dichotomy'? You cant just say that anyone who thinks 2 related spheres should be seperate is a proponent of the mind-body split without engaging in gross psychologizing.

I didn't engage in psychologizing, and I wasn't criticizing the distinction as such. I was explaining the philosophical roots of the politics-economics dichotomy, the view that they are not only different but unrelated, which was the issue we were discussing if you go back and read the first post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one of the reasons, or perhaps just a related symptom, of why one might say political and economic systems are separate has to do with the ridiculous notion that Nazi Germany had a capitalist economic system. It has to do with the false dream and hope of communists that one might have all the benefits of capitalism, but be able to have socialism as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Throughout his discourses Plato often makes an analogy between the state and the human body/mind. He maintains that the body is a hierarchy of systems controlled by the mind/brain/head and that society itself is a system of hierarchies and his philosophy concerns a search for the best system of government possible.

Western Philosophy has never left this most central of points.

That the mind and body are intergrated and the success of each is woven into the other is dealt with primarily by certain eastern philosophies.

At the center of reason must lie the will to live. Its the basic axiom for life; survival.

However with advanced mind capable of abstraction the majority of humans appear to have placed such illogical abstractions as pleasure at the heart of their philosophy. In such cases the body becomes subservient to the ego.

Contrasting the hierarchal dichotomizing of ourselves to that of society, or of any group unit, whether it be corporation/employees or government/subjects is it not any surprise that things appear to be heading in a negative direction?

In the case of the corporation would it not be more logical to take into account the needs, and potentials of your employees. Would that not produce a more sustainable business? And would the means of business not be better targeted selling products that do not degrade their consumers?

In the case of the government would it not be more logical to take into account the individuality of its subjects? Would it not be more prudent to focus its resources upon education rather than rule making or state policing?

In the case of ourselves would it not be more logical to take into account that pleasure is a product of habit, and that satisfaction can potentially be gotten from any number of things? Would it not be more rational to live a life that derives fulfilment from acts that prolong and enhance that life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...