Capitalism is morally neutral; it's nothing more than the government not interfering with the economy. Now people can do good things or bad things with this freedom, some will abuse a capitalist system, but that's not a failing of capitalism, a capitalist system does not FORCE any economic behavior, it merely allows it.I think that there is something wrong with the profit motive, when the almighty dollar is placed above the worth of human life. If the profit motive is impelling people to profit by fueling the arms race and by waging aggressive wars and subsequently, innocent people will suffer and die, then it is not a motive for the good.
Any other economic system is, by definition, less than absolute freedom; therefore it includes the use of force against individuals by the state thus giving any economic system except capitalism at least the potential to be evil.
Greed, or the absolute place of the dollar, is what drives economies. All of them. The difference is how much influence one party has over another.
Foreign policy isn't linked to economics (directly). Foreign politics are driven by the political ethos of the country. Now, debating the merits of individual wars/conflicts, and what policies are driving them and why, is a-whole-nother thread topic. So, I'll leave that alone, here.
But in any case, I don;t see where pure capitalism exists today. There is always some government intervention, at least in the form of taxation, and usually there are all kinds of governmental regulations. The taxes on business enterprises are then used for socialist enterprises such as public libraries, public education, public museums, public parks, public police protection, public post office services, public registration of automobiles, enforcement of regulations on businesses, etc.
Pure capitalism hasn't ever existed. The closest we got was during the 18 and 19th century. This is where the "evils" of capitalism can be found, that is, where too much freedom may promote or provide undo opportunity for business corruption.
Taxes, like tariffs, have always been a favorite of states because they allow the state to artificially encourage domestic use of goods (by way of raising the price of imported goods).
The taxes on business enterprises are then used for socialist enterprises such as public libraries, public education, public museums, public parks, public police protection, public post office services, public registration of automobiles, enforcement of regulations on businesses, etc.
It's not just business taxes that support these, though I'm sure that's not what you meant. This however is where the debate in the US is so strong, that is, between the Mixed and Socialist models, or how much input and taxation is good, needed, or necessary.
I am very much opposed to absolute freedom and absolute unfettered capitalism which has led to immoral situations such as the purchase and enslavement of the African female by the white European male.
I agree, pure capitalism is dangerous, leaving open too much opportunity for business immorality. The state should be involved, on some level, to ensure business responsibility (ever read the book "The Jungle"?).
For example, in the US, after a mine has removed the ore from a particular location, it is no longer allowed to leave an unused open mine. It is now required to cover and replant "to mimic the original terrain". Also, in order to limit the effects of "Acid Mine Drainage
", the business is required to provided certain measures to counteract the effects (e.g. placing limestone in drainage channels. The limestone (or calcium carbonate) combines with the acidic runoff neutralizing the acid (TUMS is limestone (calcium carbonate), same action).