Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
When I saw this video on the homepage of YouTube this morning I knew I was going to be in for a treat, and I was right. Cornell West is a clueless academic who seems to direct his efforts into making a good performance rather than a sound argument. I think West is not used to actually debating someone who is intelligent and can hold his own on a subject because he seemed incapable of processing what Schiff was saying. It was like stories of missionaries explaining to primitive people in a remote region what's going on in the rest of the world. I'm glad we have this video evidence to prove West's ignorance and his inability to answer the opposing viewpoint.
However, I watched one of the videos of Schiff mixing it up with OWS protesters and it sounded like he was conflating greed with self-interest and I think that's problematic. Ever since Rand there have been people making the case that free markets are based on greed and it's a myth that needs to be busted. Self interest is not the same as greed and it's self interest that drives economic growth and development. Greed is a given no matter what type of economic system we have but capitalism is the best system we have to mitigate it.
- Comment (38)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Great clip, thanks. What is often missing in dialogues such as this is the understanding that immorality is what undermines any economic system. What is lacking in our society today is a shared moral framework. Rational humanism which believes in a relativistic moral framework will always be in oppostion to the transcendent moral values embraced by western civilization which undergirds our free enterprise system. Theft is theft, it doesn't matter if the thief is a socialist or a capitalist!
Edited on Oct 29, 2011 at 5:08pmMay '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
I watched the OWS video yesteday, and now this one. I really like this guy Peter Schiff. He explains things clearly and does it with a smile. He is a great asset for our side in that he may, just may get a few people out there to rethink their assumptions.
bereket kelile
Cornell West is a clueless academic who seems to direct his efforts into making a good performance rather than a sound argument. I think West is not used to actually debating someone who is intelligent and can hold his own on a subject because he seemed incapable of processing what Schiff was saying.
Yes, it seems that all he could do was say "you're wrong" and then try to talk over Schiff. These kinds of debates are great for our side. :)
Feb '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
I appreciated West’s levity. People on the Left aren’t usually supposed to have a sense of humor.
Jan '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
What's problematic is who the heck can define the distinction between the two? Do you just know it when you see it? Won't human behavior and the counter reactions [also human behavior] to what most people see as greed, cause the so-called greedy person to not be able to capture as much from the market? The more and more I see this kind of stuff written, the more and more I believe that Bryan Caplan was way ahead of anyone.
May '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Good Berean: Great clip, thanks. What is often missing in dialogues such as this is the understanding that immorality is what undermines any economic system. What is lacking in our socitey today is a shared moral framework. Rational humanism which believes in a relativistic moral framework will always be in oppostion to the transcendent moral values embraced by western civilization which undergirds our free enterprise system. Theft is theft, it doesn't matter if the thief is a socialist or a capitalist! · Oct 29 at 11:56am
Edited on Oct 29 at 11:57 am
The purpose of free markets and constitutional government is precisely so that we don't have to rely on a shared moral framework. Competition, in markets and politics pits, as Madison said, ambition against ambition, so that a businessman seeking sales and a politician seeking support do what is right not because they want to, not because they are virtuous, but because the failure to do so costs them dearly. Markets and polities based on shared moral values are small and closed. The west has experienced universal claims, but never universal values, and those claims were upheld by force. Hence a limited social contract.
Nov '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
bereket kelile
Ever since Rand there have been people making the case that free markets are based on greed and it's a myth that needs to be busted. Self interest is not the same as greed..
We are wanting for a better definition of the pejorative, greed.
Challenge the lowest character at OWS with a picture of a starving naked child from some awful place, and ask him:
"Are you greedy? Would this starving child think that you are greedy because you are fat, fashionably clothed, extravangtly housed even in a tent, with calories to burn espousing your opinions? Of course that child would think you greedy! Your abundance is so far in excess of what this child needs (and wants) that you must count yourself among us all. Who are you to speak of others as greedy?"
...well, that's what I once said to my dear sister Olga. She got the point, but it didn't attenuate her indignation. Anyhow, Olga more than tithes, lives simply (by American standards), and truly cares for all. She is only mistaken about remedy.
Jan '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
David John
bereket kelile
Ever since Rand there have been people making the case that free markets are based on greed and it's a myth that needs to be busted. Self interest is not the same as greed..
We are wanting for a better definition of the pejorative, greed.
Challenge the lowest character at OWS with a picture of a starving naked child from some awful place, and ask him:
"Are you greedy? Would this starving child think that you are greedy because you are fat, fashionably clothed, extravangtly housed even in a tent, with calories to burn espousing your opinions? Of course that child would think you greedy! Your abundance is so far in excess of what this child needs (and wants) that you must count yourself among us all. Who are you to speak of others as greedy?"
...well, that's what I once said to my dear sister Olga. She got the point, but it didn't attenuate her indignation. Anyhow, Olga more than tithes, lives simply (by American standards), and truly cares for all. She is only mistaken about remedy. · Oct 29 at 5:15pm
'Liked'; with enthusiasm.
Oct '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Kenneth Gauck
Good Berean:. .. immorality is what undermines any economic system. What is lacking in our society today is a shared moral framework. .. Theft is theft, it doesn't matter if the thief is a socialist or a capitalist! · Oct 29 at 11:56am
Edited on Oct 29 at 11:57 am
The purpose of free markets and constitutional government is precisely so that we don't have to rely on a shared moral framework. Competition, in markets and politics pits, as Madison said, ambition against ambition, so that a businessman seeking sales and a politician seeking support do what is right not because they want to, not because they are virtuous, but because the failure to do so costs them dearly. Markets and polities based on shared moral values are small and closed. The west has experienced universal claims, but never universal values, and those claims were upheld by force. Hence a limited social contract. · Oct 29 at 5:13pm
Markets are undermined and distorted by theft. Socialism is institutionalized theft. Our Constitution came about because the majority of Americans at the time shared a common morality and institutionalized that morality in the form of a particular political framework.
Oct '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
LowcountryJoe
What's problematic is who the heck can define the distinction between the two? Do you just know it when you see it? · Oct 29 at 5:08pm
It's not as difficult as you make it seem. When I look both ways before crossing the street I'm not being greedy, I'm just acting in my self-interest. Self-interest is about mitigating risk and being prudent whereas greed is about enriching yourself even at the expense of jeopardizing others. The greedy person is an egoist, concerned only with himself. Now, it gets complicated when you face moral dilemmas in which your interests are conflicting with others but for the most part we can easily distinguish between self-interest and greed.
May '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Good Berean
Markets are undermined and distorted by theft. Socialism is institutionalized theft. Our Constitution came about because the majority of Americans at the time shared a common morality and institutionalized that morality in the form of a particular political framework. · Oct 29 at 5:30pm
There was no common morality at the founding, this is why a system of check and balances was employed at the Federal level and most power was left to the states. People disagreed profoundly about central moral issues and wanted a state that was indifferent and/or weak with regard to these contested issues. Madison's own theory was that the sheer diversity of opinion on moral questions would serve as a check on any one position so that no one universal claim could impose itself on everyone.
May '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
bereket kelile
for the most part we can easily distinguish between self-interest and greed. · Oct 29 at 5:50pm
I disagree. Most people most of the time are motived by both, and invariably defend themselves by pointing to their interests and ignoring baser motivations. A person's critics see only the greed and ignore the self interest. Disentangling the two without reliable mind-reading is impossible, and fortunately, unnecessary. What we do as often as possible is insure that the incentives align to make scoundrels do what is right. We might refer to this as an invisible hand. For the most part, attempts to distinguish between greed and interest are a red herring.
Mar '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Kenneth Gauck
The purpose of free markets and constitutional government is precisely so that we don't have to rely on a shared moral framework. · Oct 29 at 5:13pm
You mean like the unifying spirit of fascism?
Jan '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
I wonder, is Cornell West a Marxist, and, if so, would that have anything to do with the impermeability of his mind to market-price assumptions?
I wonder how many original watchers of that program thought Peter Schiff was a racist.
Schiff's demeanor was so well controlled. He must have practiced for hours by debating a brick wall.
Oct '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Kenneth Gauck
Good Berean
Markets are undermined and distorted by theft. Socialism is institutionalized theft. Our Constitution came about because the majority of Americans at the time shared a common morality and institutionalized that morality in the form of a particular political framework. · Oct 29 at 5:30pm
There was no common morality at the founding, this is why a system of check and balances was employed at the Federal level and most power was left to the states. People disagreed profoundly about central moral issues and wanted a state that was indifferent and/or weak with regard to these contested issues. Madison's own theory was that the sheer diversity of opinion on moral questions would serve as a check on any one position so that no one universal claim could impose itself on everyone. · Oct 29 at 6:21pm
I would disagree about a common morality. There were denominational divisions but in terms of morality there was a shared Christian worldview. Read the Northwest Ordinance and you will see that the founding generation valued religion (meaning Christianity) and morality as the foundation of the Republic.
Nov '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
"Free-market tyranny that was going on in the 1920s." What is that supposed to mean? I agree with Bereket that it sounds as though Professor West is having a new experience--almost as if he has never heard basic economic arguments before.
I will also say that Professor West (like Peter Schiff) has a rather winning personality. It almost makes it seem as though he would be open to persuasion, if actually confronted with reality.
Oct '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Kenneth Gauck
I disagree.· Oct 29 at 6:28pm
Me too. I did just disentangle the two and it was pretty easy. It's definitely not a red herring because the Left perceives free markets to be about greed. This is a misunderstanding they, and some on our side, have about what drives free markets. It's interesting you mention the invisible hand because Smith himself made the distinction between greed and self interest and I think he would say that free markets are about the latter. Just because people try to blur the lines doesn't mean that the problem is the line and the solution is to get rid of it. In fact, what you said could be applied to all good and bad behaviors but I don't think either of us would accept that logic and conclude that distinguishing between good and evil is a red herring.
May '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Good Berean
I would disagree about a common morality. There were denominational divisions but in terms of morality there was a shared Christian worldview. Read the Northwest Ordinance and you will see that the founding generation valued religion (meaning Christianity) and morality as the foundation of the Republic. · Oct 29 at 7:13pm
Glossing over the denominational, regional, and party differences is significant. Sure the founders shared a broadly Christian world view, but as some of the founders themselves observed, what all Christians shared with each other, they also shared with every civilization, including Muslims, Hindus, and Confucians. Civilization must obviously be based on the idea what we are each morally striving beings, no one argues to the contrary. But the founders did not advocate a single set of universal moral or political claims. Its easy to see harmony across 200 years (ignoring various succession crises, a civil war, a rivalrous party system, strident contention, and change over time and place) but the observation that most struck observers at the time was what a diversity of customs, religions, habits, and practices characterized the inhabitants of the new nation, and how despite this they functioned as one. E pluribus unum.
Oct '10
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
Kenneth Gauck The purpose of free markets and constitutional government is precisely so that we don't have to rely on a shared moral framework. · Oct 29 at 5:13pm
If Virtue & Knowledge are diffused among the People, they will never be enslav'd. This will be their great Security. - Samuel Adams
Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. -Joseph Story
Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks-no form of government can render us secure. To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea, if there be sufficient virtue and intelligence in the community, it will be exercised in the selection of these men. So that we do not depend on their virtue, or put confidence in our rulers, but in the people who are to choose them.- James Madison
May '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
What part of this is "shared"? There is a world of difference between saying men must be moral and men must share a morality.
Apr '11
Re: Peter Schiff vs. Cornel West: Flame Meets Gasoline
"Many secular Jews and others fervently yearn for a good society. It is a yearning I share. The record shows, however, that with all its problems, a God-based society — as envisaged from Moses to Isaiah to Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin — is the best chance we have to actually make one"
--- Dennis Prager
....just thought I'd throw in a quote from this week's Ricochet podcast guest.