Posted 01 June 2007 - 12:26 AM
Sorry, didn't catch this post. Glad to meet you cojonelso.
Your understanding of Capitalism is pretty much on par with how most people see it, although you probably give it a bit more slack than most. Unfortunately I would have to rate your philosophical conclusions a bit lower, though not as low as the common religion as at least you've taken it upon yourself to have an understanding of the world based on your own observations.
Humans are social, and this has root both in our evolutionary past, and as a product of our rational faculty. There is incalcuable benefit to the individual to participate in a society, provided that it is on a voluntary basis and that society recognizes the individuals rights as a human being. These rights extend so far as the rights of the next individuals rights begin. These are rights to action, meaning that the individual has the right, as the US Constitution says rather brilliantly, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This leaves the individual to pursue any course of action available to them, to cooperate and to trade with whomever they choose. Through cooperation and trade humans have achieved advanced civilization and technologies which have freed them from a life a toil and self-defense.
The moral basis and practical definition of Capitalism is voluntary trade. The motives that drive people to compete, to cooperate, and to trade are selfish, healthy, and virtuous. Competition is not a negative thing for either the individual or society (being only the sum of all individuals in a population). Competition will bring out the best in an honest and moral person, as it may expose the evil in an a dishonest and immoral person. In most cases it will improve the moral character of a person. Either way, competition in any instance is engaged in voluntarily. If a person is not able to compete in a given endeavor they will either stagnate in mediocrity or move on to a field in which they can excel. Competition is unquestionable positive for society; it is because people and businesses are free to compete with each other that we can have high quality and affordable commodities.
Inequality, your second concern, is not a bad thing either. Wealth inequality merely indicates that some have more than others, it does not indicate the conditions of those on the lower ends of the scale. The living conditions of the poor in the US are incomparibly better than the average peasant living under soviet Russia or China. There is no limit to the amount of wealth a society can produce, and there is no reason why the lowest income earners in a society making a fraction of what the upper-level income earners make would not be making a very good living. The old adage "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer" is true only in circumstances of economic regulation, under free market conditions a high amount of income distribution is a sign of a healthy economy. Capitalism is the only socio-economic-political system that is capable of increasing the standards of living for all classes of society, Socialism and Communism are at best capable of bringing everyone down to lowest common denominator and keeping them there.
It's too bad that you've come to the conclusion that humans do not have free will, and that morality is relative. These conclusions will prevent you from accepting the moral basis for Capitalism, as moral relativity requires that nothing have a moral basis, and it will prevent you from recognizing and accepting the true value of human life and freedom.