Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

The Triumph of Conservatism *

Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2012 1:55:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Triumph of Conservatism is an excellent book by the esteemed Gabriel Kolko.

In The Triumph of Conservatism, Kolko argues that the so-called Progressive Era was anything but and instead served the interests of Capital, rather than the people. Here is an excerpt from the book:

"Despite the large number of mergers, and the growth in the absolute size of many corporations, the dominant tendency in the American economy at the beginning of this century was toward growing competition. Competition was unacceptable to many key business and financial interests, and the merger movement was to a large extent a reflection of voluntary, unsuccessful business efforts to bring irresistible competitive trends under control. Although profit was always a consideration, rationalization of the market was frequently a necessary prerequisite for maintaining long-term profits. As new competitors sprang up, and as economic power was diffused throughout an expanding nation, it became apparent to many important businessmen that only the national government could rationalize the economy. Although specific conditions varied from industry to industry, internal problems that could be solved only by political means were the common denominator in those industries whose leaders advocated greater federal regulation. Ironically, contrary to the consensus of historians, it was not the existence of monopoly that caused the federal government to intervene in the economy, but the lack of it."
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
inferno
Posts: 10,660
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2012 2:22:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/10/2012 1:55:26 PM, Reasoning wrote:
The Triumph of Conservatism is an excellent book by the esteemed Gabriel Kolko.

In The Triumph of Conservatism, Kolko argues that the so-called Progressive Era was anything but and instead served the interests of Capital, rather than the people. Here is an excerpt from the book:

"Despite the large number of mergers, and the growth in the absolute size of many corporations, the dominant tendency in the American economy at the beginning of this century was toward growing competition. Competition was unacceptable to many key business and financial interests, and the merger movement was to a large extent a reflection of voluntary, unsuccessful business efforts to bring irresistible competitive trends under control. Although profit was always a consideration, rationalization of the market was frequently a necessary prerequisite for maintaining long-term profits. As new competitors sprang up, and as economic power was diffused throughout an expanding nation, it became apparent to many important businessmen that only the national government could rationalize the economy. Although specific conditions varied from industry to industry, internal problems that could be solved only by political means were the common denominator in those industries whose leaders advocated greater federal regulation. Ironically, contrary to the consensus of historians, it was not the existence of monopoly that caused the federal government to intervene in the economy, but the lack of it."

Conservatism is on its way out. I am talking about the social aspect of this ideology. It is dead.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2012 11:40:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/10/2012 2:22:10 PM, inferno wrote:
At 1/10/2012 1:55:26 PM, Reasoning wrote:
The Triumph of Conservatism is an excellent book by the esteemed Gabriel Kolko.

In The Triumph of Conservatism, Kolko argues that the so-called Progressive Era was anything but and instead served the interests of Capital, rather than the people. Here is an excerpt from the book:

"Despite the large number of mergers, and the growth in the absolute size of many corporations, the dominant tendency in the American economy at the beginning of this century was toward growing competition. Competition was unacceptable to many key business and financial interests, and the merger movement was to a large extent a reflection of voluntary, unsuccessful business efforts to bring irresistible competitive trends under control. Although profit was always a consideration, rationalization of the market was frequently a necessary prerequisite for maintaining long-term profits. As new competitors sprang up, and as economic power was diffused throughout an expanding nation, it became apparent to many important businessmen that only the national government could rationalize the economy. Although specific conditions varied from industry to industry, internal problems that could be solved only by political means were the common denominator in those industries whose leaders advocated greater federal regulation. Ironically, contrary to the consensus of historians, it was not the existence of monopoly that caused the federal government to intervene in the economy, but the lack of it."

Conservatism is on its way out. I am talking about the social aspect of this ideology. It is dead.

how?
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2012 11:52:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/10/2012 11:40:17 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 1/10/2012 2:22:10 PM, inferno wrote:
At 1/10/2012 1:55:26 PM, Reasoning wrote:
The Triumph of Conservatism is an excellent book by the esteemed Gabriel Kolko.

In The Triumph of Conservatism, Kolko argues that the so-called Progressive Era was anything but and instead served the interests of Capital, rather than the people. Here is an excerpt from the book:

"Despite the large number of mergers, and the growth in the absolute size of many corporations, the dominant tendency in the American economy at the beginning of this century was toward growing competition. Competition was unacceptable to many key business and financial interests, and the merger movement was to a large extent a reflection of voluntary, unsuccessful business efforts to bring irresistible competitive trends under control. Although profit was always a consideration, rationalization of the market was frequently a necessary prerequisite for maintaining long-term profits. As new competitors sprang up, and as economic power was diffused throughout an expanding nation, it became apparent to many important businessmen that only the national government could rationalize the economy. Although specific conditions varied from industry to industry, internal problems that could be solved only by political means were the common denominator in those industries whose leaders advocated greater federal regulation. Ironically, contrary to the consensus of historians, it was not the existence of monopoly that caused the federal government to intervene in the economy, but the lack of it."

Conservatism is on its way out. I am talking about the social aspect of this ideology. It is dead.

how?

Do tell.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-