Cronyism vs capitalism

[Ry]

I'd blame gross disparity of wealth on cronyism of the state, and I'd credit there being wealth at all on capitalism. Bailouts and War, and State contracting aka awarding monopolies, are all enabled by the state not the market or capitalism. Every communist I know seems to blame what the government does on corporate influence. I'd say intuitively they still understand that its the state that has the power and businesses who are competing to influence it. Getting rid of private property and allowing the state full control over production is to go full blown cronyism as the state is not some benevolent entity that will redistribute wealth out of the goodness of its heart. Furthermore wealth is not "distributed" other than by the state, wealth is the result of production which is based on skills, work and demand. It isn't even because people are not equal in ability or drive. I don't think human sensibilities gagged at seeing gaps in wealth is what drive people to ignore logical inconsistencies and embrace communism. I think the main attraction is its contrarian to the surrounding dominate economic theory, making it rebellious thus attractive to no nothing teenagers, and it's an appeal to extreme sense of jealousy and selfishness, that hides behind virtue signaling about class.

From a tribal stand point, the family or band who put the effort and risk in to kill the boar, dear, whatever or caught the fish, feel like they should be the ones who get to eat it. Why should they have to give parts of it away to people who didn't contribute to it. If they did, that would encourage people to be do nothing bitches. Instead the concept arises that those who do, get to decide. If they want to eat the meat they can, if they want to trade it with someone who did some other useful thing, made pots, watched the children, tanned the hides, then tha'ts on them and that is capitalism and it encourages people to develop a skill or trade and yet not have to be a master of all trades. It's the most functional model for early society. The gag reflex is not towards the person with the best hut, it is towards the parasite who doesn't contribute. No one just gave them a hut, they had to build it or trade things to get others to build it. Work ethic is not divorced from possession and wealth, until you introduce violence (such as killing and stealing someone else's stuff) or a state, which with a monopoly of force gets to steal from everyone and redistribute it to themselves and their friends. So desiring a super state has got to be the most blind and wrong-direction, reaction possible when reacting to the disgust at cronyism.

People are not disgusted about people working harder having more than those who dont. What we have disgust for is people having more who didn't do anything to earn it. The way that happens at the greatest scale is via the State.

[haarp]

The counter argument is that the "state" is an extension of capitalism, it's born out of it to stop complete chaos with people scrambling over each other trying to beat the other guy at whatever cost to environment, public health.

[Ry]

That is not a counter argument. I am not arguing that a state should not exist. I am arguing that the state should not be engaged in cronyism. Governments should be a referee not the coach. They should not be in the business of picking winners and losers in the marketplace. ASs it is now people do not join government to serve the public they join government to peddle influence for cash to serve themselves.