Is capitalism an ideal belief system?

We, the human species, loves to be in control about things in our life by under the influence of ” your fate is on your own hands”. I feel, some people might have misinterpreted  the statement instead i think we should say ” you reap what you sow”. This means that we can merely only control our own life instead of multiples. Because every human has their own belief, and we do not like to live under one command, nor only one order. For example in this modern world, “Capitalism” is the most popular term among the elites of the 21st century. The simple belief of “one person’s earnings could not be further increased except at the expense of another’s.”, this is Capitalism. In this way, humans have created a hierarchy order or in other words a “Dog eat Dog” world. We all know that from the very core of human nature, we love freedom, we struggle to earn freedom for our lives, which is why i think capitalism is a total opposite from such idea. I would actually say capitalism is today’s world of the 18th century slavery. Because the idea of capitalism is a vicious cycle where once an individual get caught into it, can never get out from it. The “Rich” will get richer, where the poor will get poorer because the rich will continue to milk out from the poor till the poor class will not be able to adapt to survive in the society which is created by the rich and elites.

Besides that, another problem about capitalism is that the belief of infinite natural resources and workforce. Thus this will chain react with an additional problem which is those who are without resources have no way to generate wealth. As for the work force, unless there is productivity, if not, one will be discard from the society. In this case, to promote more productivity, the only tool is to “force”. But no amount of force will make men more able, force can only make men less able. The only means in order to have “the poor” to break free from such cruelty  is to destroy the rich. But because wealth is created and consumed individually, this will not make anything better in a long run. It will all be another cycle of “Poor Dog eating another Poorer Dog”. For example, you can rob a man and live off on his fruits of labor, but you will need to kill his tree to bring him down to his knees. However, there will be no more fruits for one to rob but only to find another new victim to rob. Capitalism is just like a pyramid scheme that can only end in death for all.

So, here is the truth, the wealthier people you are surrounded with, the better off you are. The more wealth your neighbors have, the more they can buy. One man who posses a bigger tree does in no way negatively affect any other people, unless he uses his wealth to initiate negative force. Thus, everyone gets richer under capitalism where anyone is fee to do so.

Therefor, as an architect, we are usually being paid to make big, great monumental buildings so that through huge developments we can tame down the public, creating an illusion that corporate are creating more jobs from the construction of a building till the hiring positions within the building.This is a so called “Smoke Bomb” illusion for the public. By feeding them with jobs and tying down their feet on ground to work within the system which is created by a capitalist belief. Well, the question is up to the architect to answer whether as an architect do we take the side of the rich, (the one that feeds your brad on table), or do we join in the fight and struggle of the lower class system.



  1. Okay, I might end up writing a full blog-reply to this but I fundamentally disagree with much of your core argument. To start with your given definition of capitalism: one person’s earnings could not be further increased except at the expense of another’s – is not true (my opinion, no hate).

    First I want to redefine “earnings” to mean net worth (NW = total assets + equity – debt) and redefine “expense of another’s” as employment. These definitions are more tangible to work with. Yeah this definition somewhat holds up but it is also attempting to say that the economy only works in one direction and that the rich hoard money. The economy works in all directions and the rich continually invest in the economy (I’ll write a full blog post where you can call me out on it). Still I don’t think this fully defines capitalism though. It is merely stating the basic ideas of an economy based in liquid currency. This definition could hold up when defining a socialist state, a communist state, an anarchist state, or obviously a capitalist state.

    I think the aspects that define capitalism most is:
    1 – the ability to have equity
    2 – the practice to allow a (generally) free market decide supply and demand, which in turn drives price
    3 – to allow banking
    (maybe some less core ideas now)
    4 – the government taking a minimal role in job creation
    5 – allowing for a system of “dollar voting” where assuming competition exists, the superior service wins

    Competition is key to successfully implementing capitalism. I don’t think it is slavery, I think that capitalism directly rewards knowledge as opposed to manual labor. The people who make the most money are the smartest and most innovative (who work hard!) while the strongest physically are not rewarded likewise for the same effort.

  2. Hi Frank,I do really appreciate for your patience reading my post and giving me feedbacks all the time! I like you! Haha
    OK. I understand from your stand point of view about “Earnings”. It is always true that Capitalist wants more earnings, because it is the only way for them to sustain and grow the chain of the capitalist command. So, of course depending only in one source of income will not be able to sustain their mass command. Thus they will need to liquefy their money into somewhere else, for example investing in another resource of income.
    Think it as a way after they liquefy the money into another investment. How would the investment go? Of course it would grow, and it would grow bigger. Otherwise, why the investments right? And soon it would grow to a second chain of command. And then a third chain of command will be born in order to sustain the second chain of command. And so on. Soon, there will be a “Cell Hierarchy” of the Rich Chain, the Upper Class, the ones who holds most benefits and influences.
    Thus, competition will not be fair. Because, to stimulate economy the only way is to allow a “Fair” competition or markets, instead of just “printing” more money to feed your chain of people, by means it lead to inflation. And inflation is just bad, because no matter how many banks there is, or jobs is created, the “True Value” of currency will not be change.
    So the core problem is that the world is now under the major control of “Capitalism” control, where the free market isn’t available easily. Freedom and Creativity is simply lost, and people will need to work for it. And it is against the moral ethics. So it is always our choice from the beginning either to depend on the system, or we have to work harder to create our own chain of “supple and demand”, a community where everyone meets everyone’s needs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s