Is this biased reporting?

[Minionman]

This system is fundamentally Capitalist. I's not Socialist, it's not Humanist, and it's not Democratic. The freedoms and privileges we do have are a legacy earned through years of struggle by activists who were Humanist, Socialist, Communist, etc. They are not gifts from on high, and they are not part of the system of our government and society by fundamental design. The system was fought and forced to concede through fear of greater social upheaval.

You can ask; if the system is comprised of Humanistic qualities as a fundamental aspect then why do we allow children to starve, drop bombs on countries that are completely defenseless, allow the propagation of land mines, and any number of other attrocious obscenities? I'll take it you just don't understand the qualities of Humanism.

If the system is comprised of Socialistic qualities as a fundamental aspect then why are we the only industrialized nation that does not have universal health care, allow corporations all the rights and guarantees as an individual with none of the responsibility (you go bankrupt - you're on your own; a corporation faces any crisis and it gets subsidized with taxpayer money from the state and federal governments), allow companies to pay CEO's millions while they lay off thousands of workers, cut benefits, cut hours, and allow them to ship jobs overseas? That's the VERY antithesis of Socialism. Clearly, you have no idea what Socialism is.

We'd do a thousand times better under a system of Anarchism than we would under our present system of Capitalism,
[right][snapback]93361[/snapback][/right]

You're jumping a little too quickly on the "ism's" and "fundamentally" too quickly to get what happens in society. Some people do in fact make decisions to support of oppose something because of an ism, but a lot of people mainly seem to support something because they think it will work better for them, or that it will help some group, or they have just one particular thing they want and will work with whoever can get them that thing. Because of this, a society will very easily become a mishmash of things that different ism's would support.

As for being "fundamentally" something, what exactly does "funadmentally" something mean? I could come up with any system that is just a mishmash of different parts, perhaps I suggest free food for everyone, no health care, regulations on sex related morality, lots of tariffs, a medium sized military, money support for religions, and lots of control by smaller state type things. How would someone sort out what it "funadmenatlly" was? Assuming I could get the right groups working with me, I could possibly get all these into action.

To use an analogy (this might kill the argument, but I really like it), think of "nature vs. nurture" arguments you may have heard of. Almost all processes that go on in life are a combination of these two, so arguing about which is the "fundamental" cause would be pretty pointless, as both have effects. If anything, they are "fundamentally" chemicals reacting with each other, and/or electricity in nerves, and/or forces on something's body. Maybe some things are more effectecd by genes, some by embryo chemicals that happen to be there, and some by environment, but that doesn't mean they are "fundamentally" something.

The point of all this is that you can't go out and blame "capitalism" for something that exists in a society just because that society fits a lot with some "prerfect capitalist" society. You could be dealing with something from some other philosophy, or more likely you are dealing with something that has nothing to do with some governing phikosophy, just some feelings people have.