The imaginary discussions of capitalism/socialism…

These two essays taken together make it obvious that our generalized slogans, ‘democracy’, ‘socialism’, are too vague and don’t define the basis for much of anything.
While our DMNc model shows some improvement here (if its actual format were carried out) we can see how the definitions we use are not adequate and we project mostly imaginary thinking with the terms, e.g. capitalism, socialism. Not with the failure of capitalism we are stuck in a limbo of no real concepts at all.
Despite the strong case for the capitalist thesis, it is worth considering the alternate view and essay: the chinese spontaneously invented some of the feature of our DMNC model, but still without the larger framework.
Noone seems to know what they are talking about when they discuss these issues and their ‘isms’.

Source: Two perspectives: China/capitalism – 1848+: The End(s) of History

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s