So the act of commerce is ethical but the source of the commerce might not be? I feel like I'm being really obtuse here and I apologize but goods and services could be stolen or forced and rarely is legislation enough. But I can totally see two unknowing people engaging in trade at their free will for items they don't know are stolen.

I feel so pessimistic about the world at times that I find materialism and ethics just don't mix.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Commerce deals with the distribution of value, production with the creation of it. So let's say there is a widget factory. If one person "owns" it and thousands work to make widgets, their production is stolen through ownership, which causes deeper issues beyond the obvious as well.

Commerce doesn't cause problems as it's just resolving a situation of swapping the widgets you made for carrots. Barring some market-twisting forces like the stock market for example, a simple free market where you're happy with the amount of carrots you get for the amount of widgets you get is fine.

The evil of capitalism is not that you can trade. The evil of capitalism is that you go to work, and receive a fraction of the product of your work while someone else who does not work at all receives a lot of it.

Technically the current capitalist western system would be socialist, if employment without ownership would be outlawed, and coops were the enforced norm.

[–] orl0pl@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

♪ We live, We work, We buy/die ♪