As far as I know neither of them relied on slave labor or a strong central government for their success.
You picked two of the worst human beings that ever lived.
2 Likes
Iâm not defending their character, just using them as examples of successful capitalists who didnât rely on slave labor or government handouts to succeed.
They arenât better.
1 Like
Iâm not judging him for owning slaves here. Iâm pointing out he benefited from the government he helped form legalizing slavery.
This conversation isnât about normal or even moral.
Itâs about benefiting from government. And Jefferson did just that in owning a cheap form a labor made legal by the government he helped create.
No one - ITT - is speaking to the morality of it all.
They arenât better human beings, but theyâre better examples of independent capitalists.
I completely disagree.
I get what you are saying, but Ford completely manipulated the federal government as did Carnigie.
1 Like
Of course, itâs impossible to run businesses that size and not have a lot of interaction with the government, and certainly Ford and Carnegie both attempted to manipulate those interactions in their favor. But they didnât rely on the government (or enslaved people) for their success.
Government, at the time, simply recognized the societal norm of slavery. That isnât enshrining it, and it didnât mandate it either. Again, you still confuse the place society and government. .
Balderdash. Ford convinced government to model public school after the Prussians and made serfs of us all.
Like I said, Ford manipulated his interactions with government in his favor, as any capitalist would do. But did he owe his success to a strong central government? I donât think so.
Could not disagree more
They did not rely on Guv handoutsâŠbut they were allowed to basically do anythng they wanted to do, to build their busnisses, with very little oversight. Guv was hands off, sometimes even defendng businsses right to treat the employees horribly, which led to the rise of unions. Still took aother 40 years for workers to get basic rights and fair compensation.
The start up costs was higher. To have a successful slave enterprise, you had to provide housing, tools, draft animals, food, and water. With free labor, much of that start up expense is pushed onto the laborer. But you came out ahead by the value of the labor, which would last for decades, being free to you. So ultimately it was cheaper than free labor.
Chattel slavery in the new world was primarily based on economics, and justified though racial and ethnic terms. Very different from classical slavery, which was based on economics but justified through other means.
To an extent. In the case of slavers like Jefferson and Washington, they got plenty of criticism from other high class non-slavers of that time period. So you can judge them to a certain extent. And like Purp himself pointed out, Jefferson even criticized himself over slavery. But he could not reconcile the economic life it provided him with the inherent humanity of the enslaved people. But he knew it was wrong and even said so. Like most humans throughout history, he was very selfish about it.
Itâs not like we are any better. The working conditions of people who produce our phones and TVs is frankly horrifying. Yet we all accepted it as âthe price of thingsâ just like Jefferson did.
One of the best parts of history is examining the debate of pamphlets between Paine and Edmund Burke. Probably still the greatest debate between ârightâ thinking and âleftâ thinking that has ever occurred. With Paine having a more modern left wing view on matters and Burke basically creating modern conservatism as an ideology through his counter proposals.
All over the French Revolution. Paine was in the middle of it. And argued about its virtues despite its excesses. Burke was completely horrified by it and created his own ideology that completely rebuked every bit of it.
We are all the descendants of those two menâs ideals and views. Theyâre just as influential as men like Plato and Socrates in my opinion.
IMO, I think Paine was a bit disappointed in the American Revolution. It was solely a political revolution, which he found necessary but it didnât have a social revolution along with it, which is what Paine was really after. In France, he found that social revolution to participate in.
Burke instead railed against social revolution. He didnât feel the cost was worth bearing. His worldview was completely different.
1 Like
How did Ford owe his success to a strong central government?
So basically Ford benefited from a hands-off government.