Mises: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism

[NightFox]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

 

[Mac1958]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

Two, uh, "thoughts" on this:

First, it's good that the piece identifies "progressives" specifically, because that end of the spectrum has clearly separated itself from those who lean left and those who used to be thought of as "liberals". While they do still try deny their disdain for capitalism, the last few years have seen them become particularly more emboldened against it.

Second, those who support capitalism against these people are doing a piss poor job of defending it. The absolutism they're so fond of displaying (all taxes are theft, the government is evil, eliminate this department and that department, on and on and on) opens the door for the "progressives" to make gains with their arguments.

It's easy to argue for carefully-regulated capitalism against what these people want. But arguing against a Wild West kind of capitalism is also easy.

If capitalists lose this debate, it will have been their own fault.
.

 

[Jack4jill]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

Two, uh, "thoughts" on this:

First, it's good that the piece identifies "progressives" specifically, because that end of the spectrum has clearly separated itself from those who lean left and those who used to be thought of as "liberals". While they do still try deny their disdain for capitalism, the last few years have seen them become particularly more emboldened against it.

Second, those who support capitalism against these people are doing a piss poor job of defending it. The absolutism they're so fond of displaying (all taxes are theft, the government is evil, eliminate this department and that department, on and on and on) opens the door for the "progressives" to make gains with their arguments.

It's easy to argue for carefully-regulated capitalism against what these people want. But arguing against a Wild West kind of capitalism is also easy.

If capitalists lose this debate, it will have been their own fault.
.

A real capitalist knows it's a hammer, a tool, that can be used for good or evil. The minions are not capitalists, they do not know this simple fact nor capitalism itself.

 

[Mac1958]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

Two, uh, "thoughts" on this:

First, it's good that the piece identifies "progressives" specifically, because that end of the spectrum has clearly separated itself from those who lean left and those who used to be thought of as "liberals". While they do still try deny their disdain for capitalism, the last few years have seen them become particularly more emboldened against it.

Second, those who support capitalism against these people are doing a piss poor job of defending it. The absolutism they're so fond of displaying (all taxes are theft, the government is evil, eliminate this department and that department, on and on and on) opens the door for the "progressives" to make gains with their arguments.

It's easy to argue for carefully-regulated capitalism against what these people want. But arguing against a Wild West kind of capitalism is also easy.

If capitalists lose this debate, it will have been their own fault.
.

A real capitalist knows it's a hammer, a tool, that can be used for good or evil. The minions are not capitalists, they do not know this simple fact nor capitalism itself.

Careful, efficient, effective regulation can mitigate most of the evils of capitalism, and make it an easily preferable alternative.
.

 

[Jack4jill]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

Two, uh, "thoughts" on this:

First, it's good that the piece identifies "progressives" specifically, because that end of the spectrum has clearly separated itself from those who lean left and those who used to be thought of as "liberals". While they do still try deny their disdain for capitalism, the last few years have seen them become particularly more emboldened against it.

Second, those who support capitalism against these people are doing a piss poor job of defending it. The absolutism they're so fond of displaying (all taxes are theft, the government is evil, eliminate this department and that department, on and on and on) opens the door for the "progressives" to make gains with their arguments.

It's easy to argue for carefully-regulated capitalism against what these people want. But arguing against a Wild West kind of capitalism is also easy.

If capitalists lose this debate, it will have been their own fault.
.

A real capitalist knows it's a hammer, a tool, that can be used for good or evil. The minions are not capitalists, they do not know this simple fact nor capitalism itself.

Careful, efficient, effective regulation can mitigate most of the evils of capitalism, and make it an easily preferable alternative.
.

The minions have been told there are no evils.

They don't know that capitalism requires what government provides.

 

[Fenton Lum]

American style "capitalism" and Soviet style "communism" are but divergent paths to the same ultimate destination; one wherein all reasonably available access to the power of self-governance and wealth are eventually relocated into the hands of a few perched at the top.

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street Bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

That’s the current American paradigm. It’s all propaganda otherwise.

 

[Mac1958]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

Two, uh, "thoughts" on this:

First, it's good that the piece identifies "progressives" specifically, because that end of the spectrum has clearly separated itself from those who lean left and those who used to be thought of as "liberals". While they do still try deny their disdain for capitalism, the last few years have seen them become particularly more emboldened against it.

Second, those who support capitalism against these people are doing a piss poor job of defending it. The absolutism they're so fond of displaying (all taxes are theft, the government is evil, eliminate this department and that department, on and on and on) opens the door for the "progressives" to make gains with their arguments.

It's easy to argue for carefully-regulated capitalism against what these people want. But arguing against a Wild West kind of capitalism is also easy.

If capitalists lose this debate, it will have been their own fault.
.

A real capitalist knows it's a hammer, a tool, that can be used for good or evil. The minions are not capitalists, they do not know this simple fact nor capitalism itself.

Careful, efficient, effective regulation can mitigate most of the evils of capitalism, and make it an easily preferable alternative.
.

The minions have been told there are no evils.

They don't know that capitalism requires what government provides.

Can't argue, and they're in the process of shooting themselves in the foot.

What concerns me is that we end up going too far in the other direction.
.

 

[NightFox]

Two, uh, "thoughts" on this:

First, it's good that the piece identifies "progressives" specifically, because that end of the spectrum has clearly separated itself from those who lean left and those who used to be thought of as "liberals". While they do still try deny their disdain for capitalism, the last few years have seen them become particularly more emboldened against it.

The timeline was progressive moniker became liberal moniker becoming progressive moniker again, same box of leftist bullshit different label on the outside.

Second, those who support capitalism against these people are doing a piss poor job of defending it. The absolutism they're so fond of displaying (all taxes are theft, the government is evil, eliminate this department and that department, on and on and on) opens the door for the "progressives" to make gains with their arguments.

Capitalism "defends" itself, after all it has created the highest standards of living in human history, however it's pretty hard to overcome the temptation of "stuff paid for by other people" & "government can decouple you from the consequences of your own choices" arguments that progressives rely on. Only when one objectively looks at the abject failure of central planning and the authoritarian state during the 20th century and the history of the successes of capitalism is it easy to see that progressive promises are a bargain with the Devil that ultimately result in nothing but widespread misery and deprivation.

It's easy to argue for carefully-regulated capitalism against what these people want. But arguing against a Wild West kind of capitalism is also easy.

Personally I don't argue for totally unregulated capitalism, only that regulation that is limited to keeping a level playing field for all market participants (i.e. no fraud, no theft, no externalizing of costs, no government created and protected monopolies, no cronyism, etc..,) . Capitalism IMHO requires REFEREES to keep everybody honest however what we have today in the United States isn't a referee or anything resembling the capitalism envisioned by Smith, Ricardo, Say or any of the later schools of economic thought that evolved from their ideas (The Austrians, Chicago, heck even Keynes would be appalled by our current system).

What we have in practice today is IMHO a coporatist plutocracy flavored with a mix fascism and socialism not capitalism and it's the ever increasing power of the state that sustains and expands this system.

If capitalists lose this debate, it will have been their own fault.
.

What do you mean "their" own fault, are you not a capitalist?

 

[Mac1958]

Two, uh, "thoughts" on this:

First, it's good that the piece identifies "progressives" specifically, because that end of the spectrum has clearly separated itself from those who lean left and those who used to be thought of as "liberals". While they do still try deny their disdain for capitalism, the last few years have seen them become particularly more emboldened against it.

The timeline was progressive moniker became liberal moniker becoming progressive moniker again, same box of leftist bullshit different label on the outside.

Second, those who support capitalism against these people are doing a piss poor job of defending it. The absolutism they're so fond of displaying (all taxes are theft, the government is evil, eliminate this department and that department, on and on and on) opens the door for the "progressives" to make gains with their arguments.

Capitalism "defends" itself, after all it has created the highest standards of living in human history, however it's pretty hard to overcome the temptation of "stuff paid for by other people" & "government can decouple you from the consequences of your own choices" arguments that progressives rely on. Only when one objectively looks at the abject failure of central planning and the authoritarian state during the 20th century and the history of the successes of capitalism is it easy to see that progressive promises are a bargain with the Devil that ultimately result in nothing but widespread misery and deprivation.

It's easy to argue for carefully-regulated capitalism against what these people want. But arguing against a Wild West kind of capitalism is also easy.

Personally I don't argue for totally unregulated capitalism, only that regulation that is limited to keeping a level playing field for all market participants (i.e. no fraud, no theft, no externalizing of costs, no government created and protected monopolies, no cronyism, etc..,) . Capitalism IMHO requires REFEREES to keep everybody honest however what we have today in the United States isn't a referee or anything resembling the capitalism envisioned by Smith, Ricardo, Say or any of the later schools of economic thought that evolved from their ideas (The Austrians, Chicago, heck even Keynes would be appalled by our current system).

What we have in practice today is IMHO a coporatist plutocracy flavored with a mix fascism and socialism not capitalism and it's the ever increasing power of the state that sustains and expands this system.

If capitalists lose this debate, it will have been their own fault.
.

What do you mean "their" own fault, are you not a capitalist?

Sure, but I do wish those who are stuck in this absolutist thinking would find another hobby. They're the "they" I'm talking about.
.

 

[NightFox]

Sure, but I do wish those who are stuck in this absolutist thinking would find another hobby. They're the "they" I'm talking about.
.

Mac, IMHO you might want to consider taking a closer at the "they", you don't have to agree 100% with the "they" but "they" do have a lot of worthwhile things to say on the subject, take what makes sense (to you) for further thought and consideration and toss out what doesn't.

What's the worst that can happen?

 

[Mac1958]

Sure, but I do wish those who are stuck in this absolutist thinking would find another hobby. They're the "they" I'm talking about.
.

Mac, IMHO you might want to consider taking a closer at the "they", you don't have to agree 100% with the "they" but "they" do have a lot of worthwhile things to say on the subject, take what makes sense (to you) for further thought and consideration and toss out what doesn't.

What's the worst that can happen?

But my point is that bad messengers can fuck up a message and lose the argument. I'd rather the absolutists do something else than even go near this topic.

They're making it easier for the "progressives" to discredit capitalism.

Sure, they have some good points. But the crazy outweighs the helpful!
.

 

[Richard-H]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

HOLY CRAP WHAT A STRAWMAN!

Whoever wrote this has NO IDEA WHATSOEVER what progressives and liberals believe.

Not even worth refutiating on a point by point basis.

 

[NightFox]

HOLY CRAP WHAT A STRAWMAN!

Whoever wrote this has NO IDEA WHATSOEVER what progressives and liberals believe.

Not even worth refutiating on a point by point basis.

LOL, it's hilarious that you don't even know who Ludwig Von Mises is but at least you recognize what a futile effort it is to even attempt to refute his points in this article.

K, BUH-BYE

 

[g5000]

Ludwig Von Mises sure hit the nail on the head with this one, American Progressives go ahead and take a look in the mirror Mises handed you.

Full Article: The Propaganda War Against Capitalism
Source: Mises Institute
Author: Ludwig von Mises originally titled "How Modern History Is Taught,” excerpted from Planning for Freedom: and Twelve other Essays and Addresses

Excerpt:
"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils. Mankind, he contends, lived rather happily in the good old days. But then, as a British historian said, the Industrial Revolution “fell like a war or a plague” on the peoples. The “bourgeoisie” converted plenty into scarcity. A few tycoons enjoy all luxuries. But, as Marx himself observed, the worker “sinks deeper and deeper” because the bourgeoisie “is incompetent to assure an existence to its slave within his slavery.”

Still worse are the intellectual and moral effects of the capitalist mode of production. There is but one means, the progressive believes, to free mankind from the misery and degradation produced by laissez-faire and rugged individualism, viz., to adopt central planning, the system with which the Russians are successfully experimenting. It is true that the results obtained by the Soviets are not yet fully satisfactory. But these shortcomings were caused only by the peculiar conditions of Russia. The West will avoid the pitfalls of the Russians and will realize the Welfare State without the merely accidental features that disfigured it in Russia and in Hitler Germany.

Such is the philosophy taught at most present-day schools and propagated by novels and plays. It is this doctrine that guides the actions of almost all contemporary governments. The American “progressive” feels ashamed of what he calls the social backwardness of his country. He considers it a duty of the United States to subsidize foreign socialist governments lavishly in order to enable them to go on with their ruinous socialist ventures. In his eyes the real enemy of the American people is Big Business, that is, the enterprises which provide the American common man with the highest standard of living ever reached in history. He hails every step forward on the road toward all-round control of business as progress. He smears all those who hint at the pernicious effects of waste, deficit spending and capital decumulation as reactionaries, economic royalists and Fascists. He never mentions the new or improved products which business almost every year makes accessible to the masses. But he goes into raptures about the rather questionable achievements of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the deficit of which is made good out of taxes collected from Big Business."

HOLY CRAP WHAT A STRAWMAN!

Whoever wrote this has NO IDEA WHATSOEVER what progressives and liberals believe.

Not even worth refutiating on a point by point basis.

If anything, it is understated.

And it is still relevant today, more than half a century after it was written.

 

[g5000]

Examples of the worst of the two extremes is the inability of the pro-capitalists on the one hand to acknowledge rampant fraud and de-regulation were a large part of the causes behind the most recent Wall Street crash; and on the other, the labeling of the voluntarily uninsured as "freeloaders" by progressives who want to force such people to not only buy insurance, but to also pay more than the market rate, in order to subsidize the actual freeloaders who will receive free or reduced-cost insurance at their expense.

 

[NightFox]

But my point is that bad messengers can fuck up a message and lose the argument. I'd rather the absolutists do something else than even go near this topic.

Just so we're clear what "absolutists" are you referring to? Personally I try to get all the material I can surrounding the subject, whether the ideas of the author(s) agree with my worldview or not.

They're making it easier for the "progressives" to discredit capitalism.

Progressives have never been able to discredit capitalism except in the minds of the hopelessly un/mis-informed and the terminally LAZY. The reality that progressives are attempting to build will (if they are successful) certainly provide the irrefutable proof that everything the progressives have ever argued for produces nothing but misery and deprivation (as it always does), in the end the capitalists will always get the last laugh (Pyrrhic victory though it may be, it does give future generations a chance to learn from it).

 

[Timmy]

Capitalism unchecked will destroy itself. We saw this back in the 20s.

 

[NightFox]

Capitalism unchecked will destroy itself. We saw this back in the 20s.

Actually we didn't "saw this back in the 20's" since back in the 20's we had one of the largest expansions of prosperity in history (which might have something to do with the fact that the period is most often referred to as "The Roaring 20's") and we didn't have anything that could even be remotely construed as "unchecked" capitalism during that period.

 

[Mac1958]

But my point is that bad messengers can fuck up a message and lose the argument. I'd rather the absolutists do something else than even go near this topic.

Just so we're clear what "absolutists" are you referring to? Personally I try to get all the material I can surrounding the subject, whether the ideas of the author(s) agree with my worldview or not.

They're making it easier for the "progressives" to discredit capitalism.

Progressives have never been able to discredit capitalism except in the minds of the hopelessly un/mis-informed and the terminally LAZY. The reality that progressives are attempting to build will (if they are successful) certainly provide the irrefutable proof that everything the progressives have ever argued for produces nothing but misery and deprivation (as it always does), in the end the capitalists will always get the last laugh (Pyrrhic victory though it may be, it does give future generations a chance to learn from it).

The absolutists are those who talk about all taxes being bad, taxes being theft, eliminating departments, government is evil, etc.

Here's where they blow it: People will hear them calling Medicare or Social Security or this benefit or that benefit "socialism", or whatever. Well, those people will think "hey, I like that program, so socialism must be okay."

The argument then becomes binary, either "all taxes are bad" or not. Don't you think a more reasonable argument is that we need to be careful with taxes, to examine every application separately and carefully? All or nothing is bad politics and bad policy.
.

 

[Richard-H]

HOLY CRAP WHAT A STRAWMAN!

Whoever wrote this has NO IDEA WHATSOEVER what progressives and liberals believe.

Not even worth refutiating on a point by point basis.

LOL, it's hilarious that you don't even know who Ludwig Von Mises is but at least you recognize what a futile effort it is to even attempt to refute his points in this article.

K, BUH-BYE

It's obvious that Ludwig Von Mises doesn't have a clue as to what progressives believe.

The opening statement:

"The progressive intellectual looks upon capitalism as the most ghastly of all evils.'

Proves that he doesn't have a clue. Progressives and liberals understand that capitalism is at the heart of any health economic system.

Whatever else Ludwig Von Mises was, he certainly did not understand progressive and liberals. Since he was a proponent of the 'Austrian school of economics' it's clear that he did not understand economics either.