On American TikTok users cannot seatch the phrase “Donald trump rigged election”, however when using a vpn to a mexican server the search does return results.
On American TikTok users cannot seatch the phrase “Donald trump rigged election”, however when using a vpn to a mexican server the search does return results.
That’s still capitalism. I believe that might fall under cronyism? That, or simply oligarchy would work. But it’s still capitalism.
In capitalism the state is expressly not interfering on behalf of one business versus another. This would be like a communist state that had a stock market. It fundamentally goes against acore principle of the philosophy
Please state your Definition of Capitalism, because this seems just wrong. Also a communist state is not necessary interfering with a company, the main thing communism requires is that the means of production are owned by the workers.
You should reread my comment because the comparison was to a communist state with a stock market which like a capitalist state expressly favoring one domestic company over another it is a contradiction.
Okay, if you meant this as an oxymoron, but that was not clear.
But your Capitalism definition is still widely off, because there is not really one, but lots of different capitalisms all around the world and through history.
There is for example state capitalism which is capitalism run by a state.
State capitalism is a creation by Engles. I don’t think it really is a form of capitalism as again capitalism involves little to no involvement from the state in private business
What is your definition of capitalism then?
East India Company?
That’s mercantilism as the state approved and supported their choices.
Capitalism is the philosophical response to mercantilism so the East India Companies would not be capitalist.
Then, the US hasn’t been capitalist in a long time. Probably never was. The government has always interfered in the interest of one group or another. Sometimes, that group is (was) the public at large when it comes to labor or environmental rights. Sometimes, it’s in favor of big business. Oftentimes, it is. Interfering on behalf of one specific big business over another is just the latest step in the road of corruption that has been brazen since Citizens United was passed.
The invisible hand of the free market has never existed. The rich have always been kept in check by government interference.
It’s literally the very first capitalist nation. If you have examples of specific incidents of the government expressly backing a specific American business and suppressing another as a direct result of bribes/“donations” I woukd be interested in seeing them.
How about a foreign business? For example, a British company. The US deployed into the Middle East at the behest of British Petroleum after the largest democracy in the region elected a leader who was going to kick BP out of the country for exploiting both the country’s resources and people through horrible wages and working conditions - we’re talking company towns of the 1900s style labor practices. So the US backed an up and coming dictator who destroyed the government on the promise of still allowing BP full control of the country’s oil - Saddam Hussein.
Or how about the US funding companies like Wal-Mart with subsidies while also paying for their workers’ wages because more than 50% of them are below the poverty line while they come into an area and destroy all the local businesses and drain the wealth of the people living in the area.
Or the most recent example, the US passing a law banning a company with a social media platform called TikTok while citing reasons that US based social media companies aren’t held accountable for, despite being just as guilty.
None of your examples are favoring one company over another.
That’s an example that would need a source. Said source would also have to explain why the specific requests from the Saudi Arabian government were ignored in favor of BP’s requests as the common narrative was this was dine because the Saudi pipeline ends in Kuwait where ships are filled. It would further have to demonstrate that these companies were chosen to benefit at the cost of American companies as that would be required to prove that initial claim.
Im not going to hold my breath that you’ll find that source.