>>1058687all i'm using is capitalism as defined in modern economics -- as a system where individuals privately own capital and may use it as a means to profit -- and not in a century-old manifesto, to refer to capitalism in terms of creation of capital as opposed to how capital is distributed, which the latter promulgates
since we're talking about terms which require an understanding of what their aggregate parts mean in the context of economics (command economies, free markets, state capitalism) and not simply view them in the lens of the socialist movement, i went with the appropriate decision -- that is, to use the term "capitalism" as a term in economics, and not as the perceived "other" which the early communists insist it on being
so i'm not sure where the intellectually-dishonest part came from
also, that's not what a free market is; a free market concerns itself with the transfer of capital, and the distribution of said capital is determined only by supply and demand
a free market DOES NOT make the exploitation of nature, "marginality", equality of outcome, or "the fruits of the worker's labor" a primary concern, because they are simply beyond the nature of a free market
changing the definition of a term to what it clearly isn't to use it in favor of a bias is, to borrow your own words, intellectually-dishonest. can you tell me who or what exactly denoted your definition of "free market"?
