Is there a single police department left in the U.S. that is NOT simply a group of thugs in uniform?

Ehhh, but that’s what it is – capitalism.

According to whom?

Historically, this is completely inaccurate. The reader’s digest version goes like this: Some 19th century lefties who observed what they perceive as exploitative system of usury, state-granted monopoly/oligopoly, etc. and they call this system “capitalism”.

In order for anyone to argue tthat definition of capitalism, they need to challenge the perception did not match the reality, that is, they must argue that what these 19th century lefties observed was in-fact not an exploitative system of usury and state-granted monopoly/oligopoly. I think this is demonstrably false, bearing in mind things like the enclosures act and what with the Trail of Tears on this side of the pond and chattel slavery up until 1865 (and the remnants thereof for another century +) and countless other acts that would violate any pretense of a “free market”.

No, what the 19th century lefties observed was in fact an exploitative system — and they called it “capitalism”. Why the hell anyone genuinely interested in advancing the cause of “free markets” would ever want to adopt that term is beyond me.

The clowns over at Bill Wurst’s post didn’t get it. I wish I would’ve bothered to follow up on the comment I posted there. Then again, I probably would’ve been better off smashing my face in to a wall, than trying to argue with them. But I can’t really blame them; I once used these terms interchangeably, too, and I’m certain that on occasion I would have defended my misuse of the word “capitalism” just as vigilantly.

I learned I was mistaken. I still support free markets. I no longer find any value in using the term “capitalism” to advance that cause, though :)