Does Capitalism Really Need Democracy??




View Poll Results :Does Capitalism Really Need Democracy to Be the Best it Can Be??
Yes, absolutely 9 56.25%
Maybe 4 25.00%
No, The Two Are Completely Unrelated 3 18.75%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
Boots
 
December 11th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 

Topic: Does Capitalism Really Need Democracy??


Because the USA is a very democratic nation and also the most productive economy in the world ATM, it is sometimes assumed that freedom and capitalism go hand in hand. I'm not sure I understand the connection though. Hong Kong (before its return to the PRC) and Singapore are examples of very capitalistic places that were very very strict and not very free. Nazi Germany was very non-democratic, yet boasted a very Capitialistic and very productive economy.

Yet the greatest success stories of Capitalism are some very free, very Democratic nations. The UK of the 19th Century, the United States in the 20th Century and today, Japan post-WW2, post WW2 Germany, etc. Is this a coincidence or not?
December 11th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
I said maybe because it does require a level of consumer freedom.
December 11th, 2004  
FlyingFrog
 
Add S.Korea and Taiwan to your list too. They 4 were called the "4 Little Dragons of Asia".

If you are talking about getting rich, then it does not matter at all if you are democratic or communistic.

Majority of people are not interested in Politics at all, they only care making a living and having a happy family, only those guys and gals who read too much books wanna talk about politics.
--
Boots
December 11th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
I disagree. I think most people are in a way interested in politics. If you sit down for a conversation in Korea, one of the all time favorite topics is politics. And that's with any old joe.
In the US, talk of politics is quite rampant too.
This is often so because politics determines the way the country will follow its game plan (ideology). It also determines where the country's going to spend its money and that means short term and long term results and consequences that will affect the general population.
A population that doesn't keep up with politics is one that isn't very aware of their own world.

I think, when a country becomes wealthy enough, democracy almost becomes an inevitability because the people will want to have a say in how the decisions are made. The best way to do this is for them to select their own leaders since no one has time to sit down and start voting for individual bills etc.
December 12th, 2004  
FlyingFrog
 
Quote:
I think, when a country becomes wealthy enough, democracy almost becomes an inevitability because the people will want to have a say
Exactly my point.

First when most people are just busy and can only be busy with making a living, they don't have time to BS on politics.

Then, when you don't worry about making living anymore, then you start to talk politics.
Just like Chinese saying:
When you have eaten enough then you start to think about having some good saix with some good looking women lol
December 12th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
One problem that that pops up while nations are developing is the little problem of Greed Company Owners. Unless regulated, they inevitably seek to exploit their workers to the greatest degree that they can get away with. In a totalitarian society, these rich SOB's can pay off politicians to look the other way and have their fat pocketbooks heavily involved in the political system of that country. Because the poor working class of society has no direct say in the government, this situation tends to remain unresolved until it leads to a Bloody Revolution and overthrow of the government. I worry that Russia might be headed that way in the near future, but hopefully not.

In a Representative Democracy, such exploitation generally resolves itself because politicians have to keep the poor working class happy in order to win any election. After all, there is a lot more of them than rich SOB's.

Does that lead to Capitalism working at it very best though?

Now China is an interesting situation. You still have a somewhat totalitarianist government (Yes I know, its changing) but in their case, the remnants of the beliefs of Communism are there. That makes those politicians idealogically opposed to benefitting the rich businessman. It will be interesting to see how that situation develops, but the potential for payoffs and similar corruption is still probable.
December 12th, 2004  
FlyingFrog
 
Yes alot of those private company owners are greedy at the beginning.
But like in China, more and more rich people are starting to donate money to social warefare like building schools, helping poor people.

Also, if the working class has too much a say in the beginning phase of a country's developing, it can also be a problem. We gotta to find out a sorta balance there.

I want to point out the democracy in India, it is good, no doubt, but is it very efficient and then is it really doing much good to India's development or actually in the contrary?
December 12th, 2004  
godofthunder9010
 
 
True, Fascism and similar regimes seem to be better and getting thing STARTED, but the Democratic nations of the world can easily beat the.

But about India in particular? I'm not up to date enough on their economic and political current situation to offer comment. Maybe Xion or somebody can fill us in on some better specifics.
December 12th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
Whatever the case I think this is true: Democracy needs capitalism.
December 12th, 2004  
Trevor
 
Yes, but Capitalism definitely doesn't need democracy. The U.S. is a shining example of that. Canada needs to learn that. Stupid Liberals.