Talk:Criticism of capitalism/Archive 1

message: Does he really warrant his own section? Marx doesn't get one- marxists get one. Why shouldn't he be placed with other anarchists?Larklight (talk) 20:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Chomsky has a ton of books that have influenced the recent anti-capitalism thinking, and he is still alive and influencing current thinking by critizicing the current actions by the US. He deserves his own section because his criticism is different from the other critics. He ought to be grouped with similar critics and not with older critics, but I can't think of anyone that he could be grouped with and make sense. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Chomsky

message: Why is it that every equality government and economy method is covered with a criticism page, yet the inequality supporting (and as the article itself states, enslaving) governing styles based in capitalism only get a minor "critique"? Is it not fair and NPOV to actually give it an equally harsh rebuttal as the other forms of governing and commerce? This article comes across as very mild. Lostinlodos (talk) 15:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I can't help but wonder 

message: viz:
* CON Didn't see any discussion of them when performed the archiving. Seems like the first two definitely should be merged together. Generally think seperate Anti-Capitalism, Critique of Capitalism and criticism section(s) within Free Market or Market Economy are fine. In any case the tags are more than 6 mo old at this point. 74.78.162.229 (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: NB: There are also votes in progress on the proposed merge partners. 74.78.162.229 (talk) 01:37, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK The above stale tags were contradictory and didn't mention the real merge which would be with Anti-capitalism, taking this over there. 74.78.162.229 (talk) 06:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Finally saw the English wiki has resolved this with 2 distinct articles where the german wiki redirects from the other to this one. So that closes this action. 74.78.162.229 (talk) 06:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Tags Action 

message: "No similarly deep crisis has occurred in a developed nation since this time."  Time to change that one? 98.141.72.242 (talk) 02:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Market Instability 

message: See POV_fork#Articles_whose_subject_is_a_POV. Articles like this one have to be presented neutrally. Read the lead of Wikipedia:Content forking, a POV fork is "a content fork deliberately created to avoid neutral point of view guidelines, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts". This needs to have both the notable anti-capitalists opinions and their notable rebuttals, otherwise it becomes a POV fork where the flaws on the critiques are never pointed out. --Enric Naval (talk) 04:43, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  removal of capitalist rebuttals 

message: This ref really doesn't fit where it's being used, although I can see wanting to use it somewhere. The section it's in is about the history of criticism, not so much about modern interpretation of those criticisms. Also, the ref doesn't talk much about working conditions, which is the focus at that point of this article, but rather talks about overall quality of life. It should be pulled or used in a better way. CRETOG8(t/c) 16:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern economists on working conditions 

message: I was wondering why there was no specifically anarchist section, particularly as anarchists have been critiquing capitalism longer than Marxists have! Perhaps the Chomsky section could be renamed and expanded as his points are one anarchists have long been making (for example, Proudhon called property despotism in 1840!).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.192.31 (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No anarchist section? 

message: When was this switch made? And why? And by whom? Stand, identify, and justify yourself, please.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.228.24 (talk) 18:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree I think criticism is a better term.  Have started a page Criticisms of globalization to compliment this one.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nearly every other criticism page uses the term "criticism", rather than critique. I have no idea why this page deviates from this standard. 129.97.120.166 (talk) 14:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism > Critique? 

message: I came here originally hoping to get some sources (or at least on the trail of them) for the critique section of the Capitalism article, and found an abundance of unsourced material. I'll try to track down some of the needed references but I will need some help if anyone's willing. Soxwon (talk) 14:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: I don't know how to request this formally, but I'd like to see this article renamed to Criticisms of capitalism, as per: Criticisms of anarchism, Criticisms of socialism, Criticisms of Marxism, Criticisms of Communist party rule, etc., etc. (I'm sure there are others).
I know, I know, capitalism, as the economic system that embodies all that is pure and good right in the world, and as the guarantor of freedom and the bulwark against its erosion, is beyond criticism and is, at best, open to mild critique. Still and all, perhaps we ought to at least keep the naming of such articles consistent, if only to keep the dirty hippies, the freedom-hating unionists, the bomb-throwing anarchists, the Red Menace, the Stalinist gulag-apologists, the Che-loving guerrillas, the North Korea-coddling terrorists, and the other assorted commie pinko scum from revolting and overturning our happy little capitalist applecart.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.218.107 (talk) 06:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change