Capitalism Fails as an Ideal Economic System

Health Editor's Note: This health editor has interests other than just medical issues,and these interests are in history, literature and how history fits together and has shaped how we live. While this long comment on the ill effects of capitalism is purely my thoughts, with support of past and present historical events, you, the reader, may disagree. I welcome your thoughts on whether capitalism deserves the negativity I point out or should I be more forgiving?


One could make a point that capitalism ended in 1929 with the Wall Street Crash. The American proved itself without war.  Capitalism, as we know it, had been earlier defined as mercantilism and might well have been better described as neo-Feudalism. Even the models of colonialism that reached their height when 60% of the countries of the world were ruled by three nations proved unsustainable.

The real story of the 20th century has one primary narrative, the destruction of Germany. Bismarck’s Germany, that defeated France in 1871 in a matter of days, and that stood against banks and money lenders (Rothschilds) in two world wars, had to be taken down.

A realigned history, in no way revisionist, easily shows that our entire history of the 20th century and our wars with Germany to be pure fabrication. What we know, what we think we know as everyone is taught is in actuality the end result of a fake news disinformation program dating to the beginning of the 20th century.

There was a secret you see. There is a ruling class in the world that hates freedom, independence, and human advancement. It hates everything that is not degenerate, everything not based on exploitation, suffering, and ignorance. Opposing these forces, this world governance of gangsterism is considered fascist and more often than not anti-Semitic.

This in itself raises a question, why are those who complain about gangsterism and exploitation of the world’s populations, always considered anti-Semites, even when there is never the mention of a Jew?  This is something to ponder on and I think the answers are obvious to most.

The same monstrosity that controls the world’s central bank also created the sick religion of Bolshevism. The new religion of our time, the new enemy, as Kim Dotcom (born Kim Schmitz) points out to private audiences, is really the old enemy.  If you do not think the Internet, which is Google, Facebook and two dozen other companies, is the Rothschilds, you have not taken a look at management teams, company interrelationships, and far reaching plans that are unfolding.

There are reasons governments fear Google and Facebook. Look at ISIS.  Everything ISIS and its sisters have done was made possible on secure communication platforms, created by Google Idea Groups and Google Jigsaw.  Was it Jared Cohen and the neocons, many of whose fingerprints were on 911, that built ISIS to finish the work that was left undone when the war on terror failed?

Of course, it was.  The evidence is everywhere. Not only was ISIS all over YouTube, but ISIS battle plans and covert communications continually, according to sources, were maintained un-intercepted and uninterrupted, on Google and Facebook platforms.

ISIS could not move without the Facebook chats, aided by Google Jigsaw encryption.  Terror attacks and suicide bombings were planned and executed in Arabic on designated YouTube account comment boards, a method taught by Google Jigsaw.  They trained ISIS.  Ah, but we digress.

One could further support a point that since that time capitalism has not been able to flourish without war or at least a wartime economy.  Failures of economic equality, with a very large gap between those at the top and those at the bottom, influence of the wealthy for political gain and narrow distribution of power, conspicuous consumption, the generation of demands and artificial needs, externalization of costs at the expense of the environment, labor safety, and product quality, and the alienation of the labor force from its production are all arguments against capitalism.


We never escaped the depression until we started producing products for WWII.   After WWII, we almost immediately went into another collapse.  Economic growth of the 50s was enhanced by the Korean War and military buildup for the Cold War.  Between 1957 and 1962, we entered a second mini-depression, which we only rose from because of the Vietnam Conflict.  Still our fragile economy was nearly ground to a halt by the Arab oil embargo of 73/74 and the hyperinflation of the Carter era.

The Reagan boom, seriously misnamed as such, was hardly real economic growth stimulated by David Stockman’s now discredited “trickle-down economics.”  In reality, a massive increase in military spending combined with tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation of key industries such as Savings and Loans brought about little more than a redistribution of the wealth, continual threat of nuclear war, and with wealth being centered on fewer and fewer people, a sea of public debt, massive deficits while functioning in a Reaganite free market.

This free market was free of strict federal regulations, as Savings and Loans were systematically looted by their own officers ending in the elimination of all Savings and Loans in the United States.  In 1993, with the onset of NAFTA, capitalism, and American jobs going out of the country, there was a self-destruction.

In a perfect world, labor would have value in a market place, and historians typically cite the “black death” as the instrument responsible for creating the first free market for labor where the individual could sell his or her labor to the highest bidder.  It only required the deaths of about forty percent of the human beings in Europe to accomplish this.

The history of free labor in capitalist America has not been so clear.  Whether in Dickens’s England or the American labor system, written off by muckrakers such as Upton Sinclair and others, the relationship between management and labor has seldom responded to market forces and has most often been typified using coercive measures on both sides.

The concept of NAFTA was to give the benefits of America’s capitalist economy to all of North America by opening free trade, particularly with Mexico. The rationale was that the standard of living in Mexico would be elevated to such an extent that illegal immigration to the US would eventually end and US balance of trade with Mexico would redress as increased wages for Mexican industrial workers, and an increase in the standard of living would create a demand for American manufactured products.  However, cohersive labor practices in Mexico kept wages and previous standards far below even Mexico’s poverty level.

Typically, only women were hired because they were easier to control thus, denying the possibility of a two-income family and the absence of environmental laws due to undue influence over government policy by manufacturers created massive public health hazards as families from all over Mexico were drawn to the shanty towns on the industrialized areas.

The families who cannot afford to purchase the goods they assemble, though benefiting from capitalist employment, entered a new cycle of poverty which is far worse as they now live in communities riddled with crime and pollution, unable to afford nutritious food, and unable to educate their children (The Toledo Blade).

The result of the free trade of capitalism, as expressed in NAFTA, has been to create a permanent class of serfs living with crime, poverty, disease, and ignorance.  In turn, these Mexican jobs have been drawn off to China and current figures indicate the possibility of a net loss of employment in Mexico (The Toledo Blade).

Economists often joke that America’s economy is now based on hamburger flippers. Though America may still lead the world in some areas of technology, the fact that most products sold in America are manufactured in Asia in countries where labor has no right to organize which gives pause to the notion that the American economy is genuinely capitalist.

As is stated daily in radio commercials, “53 percent of the products of Wal-mart are manufactured in China.”  China is a Communist country with a long history of human right’s abuses and an equally long history of using slave labor.  Alienation of the worker from what he produces, although also seen in socialist economies, has a deleterious affect on the worker who is deprived of ownership of his labor.

With globalization, we find that our system can no longer be maintained with a labor force that is capable of purchasing goods and services that they either manufacture or provide.  As to whether or not the definition should be used to describe capitalism which one may normally refer to as a freedom of an individual to engage in commerce, it is hardly capitalism when our primary means of production exist in societies known for working conditions that parallel serfdom and even slavery.

However, unlike in the Middle Ages, what we set into movement as an economic system, that would eventually lead to an all powerful middle class, and with scientific gains of the industrial revolution today’s globalization is creating a permanent underclass and centering all capital with its incumbent political power into the hands of fewer and fewer people.

Capitalism is supposed to flourish in a democracy where the interests of production, labor, and consumer are meant to be expressed with moderation and balance that serves the needs of all, of course usually pleasing none. Capitalism relies on sociality and can be harmed by self-interest. Today’s political climate has matured into something far different.

Seemingly taking lessons from Germany in the 30s with a touch of Caligula’s “bread and circuses,” we are now engaging in a permanent struggle pitting ourselves against terrorist enemies, real or imagined, while diminishing our personal freedoms at home and becoming increasingly militarily aggressive overseas.  Once could make a case that this is simply more wartime stimulation for a failing economy to hide from a populace the failing of its government and economic systems.

In the capitalist economy of the US, there is the ability to move and down the social ladder, but the distribution of power is narrow and campaign contributions give corporations and individuals undue influence.  Money buys power and this can be dangerous if the person or group that ends up wielding the power does not take the best interests of the community to heart.

The unequal distribution of wealth, with a very large gap between the CEOs and the laborers, creates situations where the worker is resentful and feels slighted.  With a very large disparity in wages, some can have luxuries while others cannot, even though they may have been involved in the production of those luxuries.

The wealth of the 2000s may in fact be an illusion.  Government plays too large a part in determining how prosperous the U.S. can be.  The movement of economic gains has flowed off shore (China).  Much of the seemed economic growth was an illusion. Wars and conflict continue to be manufactured at the cost of human lives. We now have a fairly constant stream of in country (Sandy Hook, Las Vegas shooting, the Charleston church shooting, Sutherland County, Texas church shooting etc.) to keep us off guard.

Is capitalism still capitalism when it can only exist on a wartime footing with massive public debt using slave labor, controlling key natural resources at the point of a gun (Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, and Afghanistan)?  Is capitalism really capitalism when normal supply and demand is superseded by markets constantly assailed with fixed prices, or artificial shortages manipulated to raise profits or stifle competition?

Are free markets free when they require federal subsidies, be it research grants to pharmaceutical companies, price supports for agricultural production, the oil depletion allowance, or to take a step further social welfare subsidies for workers unable to live on artificially low wages or industries such as oil (aforementioned oil countries), mining (Chile), sugar, (Cuba), and fruit productions (Cuba and Central America) who have required direct military intervention on the part of the US to secure their market positions?

Capitalism is not the ideal economic system and it is most probable that there is no ideal economic system that fairly and adequately deals with all members of its society.  Capitalism does not insure an egalitarian society but it does produce a situation where the rich will undoubtedly get richer.


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.

Comments are closed.