Who Am I Talking About?
Once upon a time there were these philosophers. You might call them economists, because these particular philosophers philosophized a lot about economics. One particular philosopher guy came up with a lot of the ideas that a lot of the others who came after him copied, even though there were a lot of others both before and during his time who were also influential.
Anyway, these philosophers, with their one philosopher guy in particular, didn't like how the economy was being run by the elites of the time. Back in those days, you see, the elites who were in charge of things politically were also in charge of the economy. These philosophers and their main guy didn't think the elites did a very good job running the economy, and they thought of other ways of running the economy that they believed would be better.
Their main strategy in making the economy better was to not have the elites run it anymore. Instead of the elites, the philosophers came up with ideas about how the economy would run better with everyday people in charge. They believed their economic ideas would give regular people more freedom and prosperity, because in those days the elites who ran the economy bossed everyone else around and kept most people poor. Now, most of these philosophers were not part of the regular "masses" of people themselves; most of them, though not all, came from wealthy backgrounds. Some even came from backgrounds of those same elites who controlled the economy they criticized. Just for the record.
Some of the things the philosophers wanted done had already started being done in the economy; in those cases, the philosophers' words were used as an argument about why it was good to do these things economically. More and more of these ideas started to be picked up by people who, one way or another, took charge of things in those countries -- who became the new elites in those countries. And here's where it gets ugly.
In pursuit of economic ideas that were supposed to liberate people from the tyranny and poverty of the past, the people who were in charge of those economies took steps that made everyday average people's lives more miserable in terms of both tyranny and poverty. This seems to be because many of the assumptions made by those old philosophers became outdated due to chaning economic realities, or was maybe in some cases just plain incorrect.
A lot of this new tyranny and poverty was caused in part by the elites' insistance that the economies of their countries modernize and industrialize to produce more manufactured goods, though there were other factors too. Farmers often found themselves unable to grow food, many times pushed off their lands to make room for new industrial projects; many people starved. When people tried to protest or resist, the government (controlled by the new elites who supported the new economic philosophy) would put down the resistance with violence.
Now what am I talking about?
Some may say Communism, from its beginnings with the Russian Revolution, based on the ideas of Karl Marx and V.I. Lenin, on to the age of Soviet imperial expansion.
Some may say Capitalism, from its beginnings in the Industrial Revolution, with backing from the ideas of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and others, on to the age of corporate globalization.
Some may say ...
-------------------------
-------------------------
Back to contents:
http://jlhart7.blogspot.com/2006/07/contents.html
Anyway, these philosophers, with their one philosopher guy in particular, didn't like how the economy was being run by the elites of the time. Back in those days, you see, the elites who were in charge of things politically were also in charge of the economy. These philosophers and their main guy didn't think the elites did a very good job running the economy, and they thought of other ways of running the economy that they believed would be better.
Their main strategy in making the economy better was to not have the elites run it anymore. Instead of the elites, the philosophers came up with ideas about how the economy would run better with everyday people in charge. They believed their economic ideas would give regular people more freedom and prosperity, because in those days the elites who ran the economy bossed everyone else around and kept most people poor. Now, most of these philosophers were not part of the regular "masses" of people themselves; most of them, though not all, came from wealthy backgrounds. Some even came from backgrounds of those same elites who controlled the economy they criticized. Just for the record.
Some of the things the philosophers wanted done had already started being done in the economy; in those cases, the philosophers' words were used as an argument about why it was good to do these things economically. More and more of these ideas started to be picked up by people who, one way or another, took charge of things in those countries -- who became the new elites in those countries. And here's where it gets ugly.
In pursuit of economic ideas that were supposed to liberate people from the tyranny and poverty of the past, the people who were in charge of those economies took steps that made everyday average people's lives more miserable in terms of both tyranny and poverty. This seems to be because many of the assumptions made by those old philosophers became outdated due to chaning economic realities, or was maybe in some cases just plain incorrect.
A lot of this new tyranny and poverty was caused in part by the elites' insistance that the economies of their countries modernize and industrialize to produce more manufactured goods, though there were other factors too. Farmers often found themselves unable to grow food, many times pushed off their lands to make room for new industrial projects; many people starved. When people tried to protest or resist, the government (controlled by the new elites who supported the new economic philosophy) would put down the resistance with violence.
Now what am I talking about?
Some may say Communism, from its beginnings with the Russian Revolution, based on the ideas of Karl Marx and V.I. Lenin, on to the age of Soviet imperial expansion.
Some may say Capitalism, from its beginnings in the Industrial Revolution, with backing from the ideas of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and others, on to the age of corporate globalization.
Some may say ...
-------------------------
-------------------------
Back to contents:
http://jlhart7.blogspot.com/2006/07/contents.html
posted by jlhart7 at 7:33 PM
0 comments
