Capitalism Cures Collectivism!

How Capitalism Defeats Racism

In her essay “Racism,” Ayn Rand argues that racism — which she describes as “the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism” — is incompatible with capitalism and can only be defeated through capitalism. She defines capitalism as “a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned.” She explains that a defense of private property and laissez-faire capitalism is the only way to defeat racism:

“There is only one antidote to racism: the philosophy of individualism and its politico-economic corollary, laissez-faire capitalism. … It is capitalism that gave mankind its first steps toward freedom and a rational way of life. It is capitalism that broke through national and racial barriers, by means of free trade. It is capitalism that abolished serfdom and slavery in all the civilized countries of the world.”

Walter Williams adopts a similar view of the role of capitalism in defeating racism. He argues that only in a capitalist system, where economic gains are made through free market exchange and not by seeking political preferences and protections, can minorities make economic progress: “Free-market resource allocation, as opposed to allocation on political grounds, is in the interests of minorities and/or less preferred individuals. … The market encompasses a sort of parity nonexistent in the political arena, where one person’s dollar has the same power as anyone else’s.”

Williams’ point is that a racist seller of course wishes to sell his produce; therefore, he will not reject black buyers as he values their dollars as much as the dollars of white buyers. Most sellers would not consider it worth losing the sale simply to be true to their racist beliefs. Even in the case of a racist seller who is willing to pay a price for his desire not to transact with other races, a point is likely to come where his costs mount to a degree that he no longer considers it worthwhile to continue rejecting sales purely on racist grounds. This explains why even in the segregated states, many whites entered into commercial transactions with blacks. Williams writes:

“The fact that some blacks were able to earn a comfortable living and indeed become prosperous — in both the antebellum South, in the face of slavery and grossly discriminatory laws, and in the North, where there was at best only weak enforcement of civil rights — gives strong testament to the power of the market as a friend to blacks.”

Continue reading…

From LRC, here.

נכרים מקרקרים בהיכלו?! – הרב יוסף אלבום

מה הסיבה היחידה לכך שהר הבית לא בידנו? | הרב יוסף אלבוים

Dec 28, 2021

מצוה גדולה לעלות להר הבית על פי הלכה בקדושה ובטהרה אחרי טבילה במקווה כשרה וללא נעלי עור ובמורא מקדש. אסור להיכנס לרמה שיש עליו כיפת הסלע (מחנה שכינה). לפרטים: https://bit.ly/3GvybrS

**According to Halacha, one may only enter the Temple Mount after immersion in a kosher mikvah – following all the strict rules according to Halacha; without leather shoes; and only to the permitted areas (not within the chail. One must avoid the elevated platform in the center of the Har Habayit to keep to this rule). Since the rules about going up are many, please visit https://bit.ly/3GvybrS for more details.**

________

Website | אתר: https://www.temple-mount.co.il/ | https://www.harhabait.org.il/
Facebook | פייסבוק: / yeshivathharhabait
Telegram | טלגרם: https://t.me/drishatzion
Whatsapp | וואטסאפ: https://wa.me/message/DANDLRPTWOC3J1
Instagram | אינסטגרם: / yeshivat_har_habayit
Tik Tok | טיק טוק: / yeshivatharhabayit

מאתר יוטיוב, כאן.

EXCITING NEWS: Man In Suit Addresses Other Men In Suits! (Whatshisface In Washington)

Man In Suit Addresses Other Men In Suits

Experts believe more people in suits will continue to talk about the first man in the suit in the weeks to come, unless something more compelling grabs the media’s attention, such as a piece of attire with ambiguous hues.


Washington, March 3 – A middle-aged man in business attire apparently just gave a speech to a gathering of other men in similar clothes, sources in the Capitol building are reporting.

The man, in his sixties, read from a stack of papers containing the words he pronounced to the assembled audience, which occasionally acknowledged the content of the address with applause. Some women were evidently also in attendance, but the vast majority of the audience, which numbered in the hundreds, consisted of men with grave expressions that broke only when offering said applause, which they did from a standing position. When the applause ended, the men sat down again. This occurred approximately two dozen times during the course of the speech.

Television cameras filmed the address, which took place in a facility where that reportedly happens with some frequency. Observers noted that the cameras focused primarily on the man making the speech, but every now and then turned to capture footage of attendees. The subject of the address was apparently of some importance to the speaker, as he repeatedly made dramatic gestures and intonations in keeping with a passionate delivery. The audience must also have felt strongly about the subject, observers say, as their own reactions indicated intense interest and agreement with the man’s message.

“People tend to stand and applaud as a group only when the event or information they are applauding resonates with them in a positive way,” explained behavioral psychologist Petra Nizing. “By extension, then, the behavior of the audience at this event demonstrates that whatever the man in the suit said, the people in the  room at the time were behind it.” She added that the phenomenon probably would not have been observed to the same degree had the man been wearing, for example, overalls instead of the conservative dark suit.

“We have noticed that in the building where this speech took place, people tend to favor suits,” said FOX News analyst Forrest Forthtrijs. “Such sartorial sensibilities are consistent with what we know of people in Washington in general, especially white males.” Forthtrijs himself was wearing a gray suit when he made that observation.

It remains unclear what impact the man in the suit’s speech will have, but in its immediate aftermath, hundreds of other men and women in suits were engaged in discussions of the speech, some of which were also captured by television cameras. Experts believe more people in suits will continue to talk about the first man in the suit in the weeks to come, unless something more compelling grabs the media’s attention, such as a piece of attire with ambiguous hues.

From PreOccupied Territory, here.