What's the Point of Leaders? How Does Capitalism Help?

Those are two questions I would like to ask. These two things in human history have caused the most trouble in the world.

Leaders bring:
wars
dictatorships
fascism
death
hate

Capitalism brings:
poverty
crime
drugs
death
debt
greed

Haven't these things caused more trouble than what they are worth?

Tell me how leaders and capitalism actually help if you can.

I think mankind always has had leaders. It gives a rallying point, someone as a focal point and who is responsible. In a company you have CEOs and nations Presidents, King/Queens, Prime Ministers etc. Generally most groups of people require a leader. Whether this is still the case in todays society I feel I am too inexperienced at my age to judge. But leaders do seem to be necessary for a society to function even if they are just puppets.

Capitalism on the other hand is a society choice that has developed over the last 500 years. To be honest it should be thrown out into the bin of failed ideas. I think that it breeds materialism that causes a greed prone society.

Originally posted by Persicoana
I think mankind always has had leaders. It gives a rallying point, someone as a focal point and who is responsible. In a company you have CEOs and nations Presidents, King/Queens, Prime Ministers etc. Generally most groups of people require a leader. Whether this is still the case in todays society I feel I am too inexperienced at my age to judge. But leaders do seem to be necessary for a society to function even if they are just puppets.

Capitalism on the other hand is a society choice that has developed over the last 500 years. To be honest it should be thrown out into the bin of failed ideas. I think that it breeds materialism that causes a greed prone society.

I don't know... I'm tired of leaders telling me what I can and can't do. Aren't they no different than you and I? If one person can lead thousands, why cant one lead the one he needs to (him/herself)?

reply to post by Phlynx


Yah I agree, I'm also pissed at these bullies too. That's why to stick it too them, I might just try to go all socialist-anarchy on them. Everyone gets the things they need to survive, the wages they need to survive and even get the chance to gain more, while not needing the people o the hill telling us what to do. We the 'sheeple' can run ourselves.

Well, if you don't like it, why don't you create a new form of government. Otherwise quit crying about what wrong it does, and look at what it accomplished. You have to see things from both sides of the argument otherwise you would be considered arrogant. The world isn't a perfect place.

Originally posted by Trams
Well, if you don't like it, why don't you create a new form of government. Otherwise quit crying about what wrong it does, and look at what it accomplished. You have to see things from both sides of the argument otherwise you would be considered arrogant. The world isn't a perfect place.

I agree, the world isn't a perfect place, but it can be a whole lot better. I look at the other side, and I don't see much accomplishment besides rich people getting alot, poor people staying poor, and laws being thrown everywhere to make a sense of safety. If you think thats good, yay for you, but I believe we can do better.

Originally posted by The Killah29
reply to post by Phlynx

 

Yah I agree, I'm also pissed at these bullies too. That's why to stick it too them, I might just try to go all socialist-anarchy on them. Everyone gets the things they need to survive, the wages they need to survive and even get the chance to gain more, while not needing the people o the hill telling us what to do. We the 'sheeple' can run ourselves.

Money leads to greed, socialism leads to laziness in my opinion.
Socialism lets people sit around and do nothing, getting fat off of other peoples work. Socialism also still has capitalism, it's just that there isn't any top part of the pyramid. The workers get the food and stuff you need and supply everyone else. The workers will realize, "Oh, they're not working, so I don't need to" Then there are no more workers, and everyone starves.

Without leaders there would be complete madness and constant upheaval. Therefore, humans realized someone needs to be in charge to preserve peace and prosperity. Leaders are a neccesary evil in society as is capitalism. I am totally in favor of the capitalist mentality-- competetion without prejudice and a system free of malice-- the capitalist system, in theory, should be self sustaining because if the market was constantly competitive with a steady supply of resources there would be no worries, but the world isn't perfect. As a result of exploitation of the system the system has broke.

It is obvious there should be more ethical oversight by an organization or organizations.

Our founding fathers had to start a country from scratch. Some wanted to emphasize state and individual rights while others believed a central government should run the show. So what did our founding fathers do? Well, they compromised. Then they fought a civil war.

We eather need to compromise or start from scratch.

Now, if we choose to start from scratch (which the new health care bill could usher in) it could mean bad news for the stars and stripes.

I personally think American buisness practices should have oversight increased on big corporations and grant smaller buisnesses money or lower their taxes. By stimulating small buisness, the buisness could in turn increase consumer spending because by granting small buisness money buisness will as a result be able to make their products more affordable or organize sales and rebates.

it isnt voodoo economics, its common sence-onomics.

But this whole explanation is completely thrown out the window if there is an underlying order that manipulates every aspect of our society. lol

Leaders are not necessary in my opinion, they are there to control.
If everyone took on a self sufficiant mentality where they grew there own food and looked after there own we would have no need to be directed in every aspect of our lives by our leaders.

Individualist anarchism doesnt sound too bad.

Individualist anarchism refers to any of several traditions that hold that "individual conscience and the pursuit of self-interest should not be constrained by any collective body or public authority"[1] and that the imposition of "the system of democracy, of majority decision" over the decision of the individual "is held null and void

Individualist anarchism- wikipedia

Lets see.

Capitalism at its core rewards those who are needed the most.

If you are not needed, you are not rewarded. Vice versa.

In essence, it goes back to survival of the fittest, except today it is not about being "fit", yet "marketable".

Even in a individualist society, the weak will die. Capitalism (in my eyes) allows a lot larger of a group to flourish at better living conditions.

Leaders are also a key part. Lets say we are building a rocket ship to the moon! Are we going to want the most out spoken person to make the plans, or the smartest? Well, hopefully the guidelines allow the smartest person to lead the group, giving the best success rate. If everyone went on an anarchist type route, changes are much smaller anything would get done.

By no means are we in a perfect world...but CURRENTLY, capitalism offers the best rewards. Keep in mind, Utopian does not mean realistic, so just because something sounds good, does not mean it will work. Such as a million dollars for everyone!

Originally posted by sicklecell
Leaders are not necessary in my opinion, they are there to control.
If everyone took on a self sufficiant mentality where they grew there own food and looked after there own we would have no need to be directed in every aspect of our lives by our leaders.

Individualist anarchism doesnt sound too bad.

Individualist anarchism refers to any of several traditions that hold that "individual conscience and the pursuit of self-interest should not be constrained by any collective body or public authority"[1] and that the imposition of "the system of democracy, of majority decision" over the decision of the individual "is held null and void

Individualist anarchism- wikipedia

I've never really found the type of Anarchy I fully agree with tell now, thanks, I'm now seeing capitalism as a very evil necessity.