Capitalism vs. Socialism Debate - LibertyCon 2018

Which is the better system: capitalism or socialism?

Washington Post opinion columnist Elizabeth Bruenig is joined by George Mason University professor Bryan Caplan to debate the topic. This debate was filmed at the Students For Liberty annual conference, LibertyCon, and moderated by Institute for Humane Studies president Emily Chamlee-Wright.

Bryan Caplan is a Professor of Economics at George Mason University and blogger for EconLog. He is the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter, named "the best political book of the year" by the New York Times, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids, and The Case Against Education, forthcoming in 2017 from Princeton University Press. He is currently working on All Roads Lead to Open Borders, a non-fiction graphic novel on the philosophy and social science of immigration, and Poverty: Who To Blame. He has published in the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, American Economic Review, Economic Journal, Journal of Law and Economics, and Intelligence, and appeared on ABC, Fox News, MSNBC, and C-SPAN. An openly nerdy man who loves role-playing games and graphic novels, he lives in Oakton, Virginia, with his wife and four kids.

Elizabeth Bruenig is an opinion columnist at The Washington Post where she writes on Christianity, politics, and public life. Previously, she was an editor for the Post’s Outlook and PostEverything sections, and a staff writer at The New Republic. She received her MPhil in Christian theology at the University of Cambridge, where she studied as a Marshall Scholar. Her essays and reviews have appeared in The Post, The Nation, The Atlantic, The Boston Review, Jacobin Magazine, First Things, and many more. She lives with her husband and daughter in Washington D.C.

[ericwycoff]

Can I PLEASE just watch a single debate ANY DEBATE that has a proper audio engineer?

[alonzobarnes]

Nowhere near enough time for a debate on socialism vs capitalism. Especially with those long intro statements.

[LeftyPlaat]

Liz was much better than I expected; too wordy at times but strong, needed to be stronger on saying socialism need not be authoritarian or statist (see comments for examples of other missing that point). I can't imagine she's still writing for the WaPost.

[nickwilson]

The first 20 mins perfectly summed up capitalism vs socialism. The capitalist talked about real countries, and she started quoting Plato.

[Uhndrash]

I feel like it ended just as it was getting good

[falcosmusic]

It ended too soon, but I love how much respect for each other they had through this debate! I didn't see any ad hominem falacia being thrown casually in attempts to assassinate the other parts character and I saw a lot of admitted convergence in certain ideas. Bravo! That's how we get to learn and grow as a society and most importantly as individuals.

[treyb]

Amazon and cheap products that are convenient? Does he have any calculation of the cost on the environment and the inconvenience of these products?

[restonthewind]

Everything depends on the definition of these isms, so I expect more heat than light.

[masterbonzala]

During the regimen of Göran Persson my parents considered to stop working becuase it would have been more beneficial for them to live off the wellfare checks than their highly taxed salaries. They decided to continue because it would look bad on their resume when things got better

[drewjohn]

She says capitalism demands rationalisation? Yet, central planning demands more computational power and routinisation of society than any mode of capitalism I have seen. The Projection is strong.

[arthurzetes]

This is why I dont like people reading their opening statements. the sentences are too long, wordy. just say it simply so we can all understand.

[GardenDan]

Astonished that when asked how something becomes your own yo said thats not a real big problem when his entire ideology stands on private property. The look on his face made it seem like that question may haunt him for a couple nights. Good.

[BizVlogs]

The only thing remotely interesting was the very last question (43:44), and then it ended before anything really happened.

[billyb]

She takes a long time to say much of nothing. She speaks fast, too, which is often a sign of a valid argument.

[henryberrylowry]

This Woman was amazingly articulate and able to explain the philosophically relevant content, through an historical lense, which would elicit such reflection as to demand an absolute overhaul of the established Order.

Hegel, to merely note, has himself denoted the necessity of negating the "positive conditions", which He Held as both necessary consquences and expressions of human efforts. We, as Alexandre Kojeve pointed out, are beings who desire our own desires. We seek to move beyond the condition we find ourselves in and then desire further.

Hegel had properly subdued Kant insofar as the latter understood the possibility of freedom as the movent beyond the established forces on the individual level, yet failed to synthesize his judgments historically and according to the way people actually behaved.

Marx revolutionized this whole trajectory by way of applying Hegels Logic to Capitalism itself. He demonstrated how capitalism could simultaneously abolish and maintain itself

[donrastar]

Capitalism is the pursuit of capital. Socialism is the centralized distribution of said capital. You are debating apples to oranges and thats why this "debate" never gets anywhere.

[tannercrandell]

What a pathetic defense she made. No one is saying that an individual should not help and support their family member. What the gentleman did say is that no one is legally bound and will be forcefully made to support a family member.

[bradwatson]

Does anyone else tire of debate? Let's have living laboratories instead. Choose two pieces of trash, uninhibited land and allow for the establishment of two city states for a period of 100 years. Let Bruenig get the ball rolling on her ideal socialist state and Caplan get the ball rolling on his ideal capitalist state. Two rules: Neither state can have a military/police force large enough to be a threat to the larger nation and neither state can have nukes. Then see what happens. As an anarcho-capitalist, Caplan might have to compromise a little and go for some kind of minarchist state, but the experiment would be wonderful. For my part, I'd choose to live in the capitalist state.

[chuckrice]

The question is: How do you slow down her speech? She goes so fast it is hard to focus on her words and "absorb" them. I found it and slowed her down to 85%. Much better!

[Quantumwolf]

I absolutely agree with
user 'admiralMcmufin'.

He says, "Not a single point was made. I was looking for an actual debate not conformation bias."
This wasn't a real debate.