Re:How the West Got China Wrong
by Treegarden on Friday March 02, 2018 @09:28AM
(#16501544)
My point was more that the basic characteristics of our modern economy (our modern economy = capitalism) also apply to early human societies. Working a profession, cooperating with colleagues and trading goods are inherent human nature. Even if you are a hunter-gather.
I wasn't referring to specific theories. My point was more about observing how the world is.
Sure. What's universal is universal. But what's the point of defining something as capitalist (or anything) if it applies to every case.
Characteristics of capitalism (let's go with the Marxist definition) certainly aren't universal. Not every human economy includes private property, for example. Not every system include a bourgiouse elite, a customary, religious or military elite is more common historicaly.
Is this rhetorical? I didn't say they could (or couldn't be). If you mean it in a curious way than let's start with 'how can a company...'
How is capitalism different from early human tribes?
It depends on which capitalism you mean, Marx's or Milton Friedman's. Also which tribe. If early human tribes were like modern ones, they had a lot of different ways of doing things.:)
For marx, you could probably stop at "they don't live in cities or work for wages" like they do in capitalist systems.
For Friedman's capitalism, they tribesmens affairs are probably dictated by customs and communal nterests, not private interests.
Idk, though. It's theoretically possible for ancient human culture to be capitalist under Friedman's definition, if their rules are compatible. Under Marx's it doesn't matter what they do, capitalism is an urban-industrial society.