A warrior teaches:
"'Nothing is fair, and only the weak seek justice. Grow strong, and take...'" (Chapter 10, p. 132)
Imagine telling a young person that. Works of fiction show us historical or hypothetical societies with this kind of ethos. The results include drama and conflict but we also need to see what society can become. Nature is not fair but we can be. The civilized administer justice. Some of the "weak" become strong when they realize their common interests. Nicholas van Rijn might say, "Grow strong, and trade...." I might say, "Grow strong, give and share..."
3 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I lean more to how Nicholas van Rijn might have put it, as you put it: "Grow strong, and TRADE..." Because commerce and trade is based on the non-coerced exchange of goods and services all parties consider beneficial. The pricing mechanism on which free enterprise economics depends makes "sharing" more practical and likely.
Btw, there have been real world ideologies or philosophies which taught much the same thing as the warrior you quoted. National Socialism comes to mind, with Hitler's stress on how "races" struggle and compete for survival and power. And Marxism, which basically did the same for "classes." Both of which I reject.
Sean
Sean: "Because commerce and trade is based on the non-coerced exchange of goods and services all parties consider beneficial."
IMHO, this is based on a number of assumptions:
1) The actors are rational.
2) The actors are equal in power.
3) The actors have perfect information.
The situations where these the criteria are all met (as determined by a neutral, unbiased, outside observer) are likely to be quite few, and probably small-scale.
It also sharing with "free enterprise"/capitalism.
On a different branch: I wonder how Van Rijn would effectively negotiate/trade with Donald Trump: Businessman? Also, in spirit if not apperance: Old Nick seems to me to resemble Bobby Axelrod of "Billions"- means well, but is determined to WIN, even if corners have to be cut:
Robert "Bobby" Axelrod: an ambitious billionaire manager of a hedge fund called Axe Capital and a Hofstra University graduate who came from humble beginnings. He was one of the survivors of the September 11 attacks and pays the college tuition of the children of his colleagues who died in the World Trade Center. He is extremely charitable and generous in public, but uses insider trading and bribery to grow his firm's enormous wealth. He has animal-like instincts that allow him to be extremely successful in his trading career. A self made Wall Street billionaire with one of the most successful hedge funds in the business, Bobby Axelrod enjoys all the trappings of his success: mansions, a private jet, a helicopter, and a personal chef. But he also doesn't forget his humble roots, or the fact that he survived 9/11 by a fluke. Although Axe's intentions are good, the temptations of greed and power are enormous and the lines between right and wrong in high finance are blurry at best. He is a shrewd enough player to never reveal his full hand to anybody.
Kaor, Keith!
But I disagree with all three of your points! As for "1," I'm not expecting or saying everyone who engages in economic activities will be rational. Your point "2" is not relevant, as a few examples will show. When I shop for groceries the store I go offers for sale many different kinds and types of bread. There are no goons from the different bread baking and selling companies forcing me at gunpoint to buy their brand. I was free to make MY choice of bread. Similarly, when I purchased a new Honda car last year, there were no thugs from Honda at the car dealership forcing me at gunpoint to buy only the most expensive car. I was free to pick and choose among different models and price ranges, and did so.
I could go on and on, but these examples demonstrates my point. All these companies could be called more "powerful" than I am (bakeries and car manufacturers). But I reviewed different options and offerings and made my choices. The bakery which made the bread I chose benefited from me buying their product. I in turn benefited from buying I chose to purchase. And the same with my new car. And the same reasoning applies to a near infinitude of economic interactions.
I think Nicholas van Rijn would have no trouble dealing with either Donald Trump or Robert Axelrod. I like much of what you said about Axelrod, it's plain he's not all bad.
Sean
Post a Comment