This parsing of definitions falls in the catagory of 'how many angels
can dance on the head of a pin'. Let's cut to the chase.
wcm
>
> Why talk of capitalism when we should talk of corporatism?
>
> Vunch wrote:
>
> > In a message dated 3/4/98 10:51:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
> > writes:
> >
> > << In response to an intelligent, and, actually, very RELEVANT point about the
> >  nature of "capitalism", i.e. a completely artificial construct which exists
> >  only due to government enforcers (protectionists) ...... we get this ------>
> >
> >  << Yea, Yea, Yea, so the essence of capitalism is quite different from
> >  currently
> >   used textbook definitions. Anything new under the sun lately? >>
> >
> >  this list has been has been a such a huge disappointment, a total waste of
> >  time. >>
> >
> > Not getting the point, capitalism is much more than government intervention,
> > it has become ingrown into the very nature of all human relationships.  That
> > is why I commented that textbook definitions were wholly inadequate to capture
> > the essence of capitalism.  It seems that you feel exactly the way capitalism
> > expects you to feel, defeated.  See ya'.............
>