source Posted July 9, 2006 Report Share Posted July 9, 2006 I've been hearing this term mentioned in the media very often, but I have no idea what it is, and I can't find its definition. From the context in which I heard the term mentioned, I figured out that such a thing is not even capitalism, and besides the term itself sounds like an oxymoron (wild as in wilderness, and capitalism as in the only civilized social system). So, I'm wondering if anyone here knows what exactly are people referring to when they say "wild capitalism"? Sorry if this is in the wrong section; I'm not sure where to put it, as it is not really a question about Objectivism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maarten Posted July 9, 2006 Report Share Posted July 9, 2006 Hmm, they might mean uncontrolled capitalism? I assume it's usually used to deride capitalism, and they might be trying to smear unregulated free markets... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherry Posted July 9, 2006 Report Share Posted July 9, 2006 I just had a vision of a very loud commerical with businessman and woman running around in bikis, thongs, and speedos on a beach parting and big red letters splattered across the screen "Capitalism Gone Wild!" And the announcer telling us to order our copy of the dvd or video today. thats all I had to add...carry on...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMeganSnow Posted July 13, 2006 Report Share Posted July 13, 2006 Lol, Sherry, that's great, I love it. You make everything . . . groooovey. From this article (and you have to read quite a ways down to get the gist of it) I think "Wild Capitalism" is simply another way of saying anarchy. Worse, it appears to be a method of equating Capitalism with anarchy. The author refers to, essentially, "corporations" acting without any government restraint . . . government restraint in this instance meaning protection of rights. Although this writer seems sympathetic to the ideals of capitalism, I think this is another case of the defenders doing more damage than the attackers. Capitalism is NOT a state of unprotected rights. I tentatively blame this one on libertarians; they're the worst proponents of the idea that anarchy, liberty, and capitalism are even remotely related. *singing* One of these things is not like the others . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherry Posted July 14, 2006 Report Share Posted July 14, 2006 Lol, Sherry, that's great, I love it. You make everything . . . groooovey. From this article (and you have to read quite a ways down to get the gist of it) I think "Wild Capitalism" is simply another way of saying anarchy. Worse, it appears to be a method of equating Capitalism with anarchy. The author refers to, essentially, "corporations" acting without any government restraint . . . government restraint in this instance meaning protection of rights. Although this writer seems sympathetic to the ideals of capitalism, I think this is another case of the defenders doing more damage than the attackers. Capitalism is NOT a state of unprotected rights. I tentatively blame this one on libertarians; they're the worst proponents of the idea that anarchy, liberty, and capitalism are even remotely related. *singing* One of these things is not like the others . . . Maybe the Libertarians should need to be slapped by the Invisible Hand. 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.