Economy and social affairs

Economic crisis and world conspiracy

Background of the undesirable developments - an overview

(Published in GralsWelt 69/2012).

It has almost become a commonplace not to see crises in catastrophic break-ins, but to emphasize the opportunities that lie in a crisis. On the one hand, it is about natural disasters such as drought, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, or even about an impact that is dangerous to civilization (impact of a planetoid), which, from a statistical point of view, could hit us. 

According to general agreement, people must endure such inevitable catastrophes and then clean up and rebuild as best they can. 

“Things are there to win life, but life is not there to win things. "               Lao Tse.

"I seriously believe that banking institutions are more dangerous than standing armies." 
Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the USA, 1816.

It is different with man-made crises, such as wars, revolutions, nuclear or ecological disasters, economic collapses, financial crashes, over-indebtedness or impoverishment of states. Here the decision-makers are to be held accountable; because it cannot be accepted that politicians, for example, do not want to be fundamentally to blame for their failures or deny their own personal responsibility[i].

Furthermore, it is urgent to ask whether mistakes in the system itself do not make it too easy for personalities obsessed with power mania, hubris or greed for money to implement their lower instincts on a large scale and to shake entire, worldwide systems. That’s the way it is with our current global economy.

There are good reasons to believe that the modern, capitalist economic system is fraught with fundamental, functional and structural flaws.

In the following, an attempt is made to give an overview from a subjective point of view of the criticisms of our capitalist world economy made by various sides. It can only be a food for thought that broadly outlines some facets of the problem.

The old roots of capitalism

The term “capitalism” was used from the middle of the 19th century and was best known through Karl Max (1818–1883). In a narrower sense, the history of capitalism begins in the 18th century. But I allow myself to look for the origins much further back.

One of the characteristics of capitalism is the importance of material property. The paramount importance of earthly property began with the transition of cultures from hunter-gatherers to nomads and farmers.

About 12,000 years ago - in the Neolithic (New Stone Age) - ownership of cattle, houses, land, cultivated fields, etc. became essential for survival. (See. "The Violent Man", under "History").

Did a striving for earthly goods already begin back then, which meanwhile has almost all people worldwide - more or less - under control? In any case, since then, material values have been considered to be the decisive, the primary property to be striven for.

Out of this, the approach of modern man has finally developed to rigorously appropriate the richness of nature (and even of other peoples) without contributing to the promotion of nature and thus to creation. An elementary violation of the spiritual law of the balance between give and take, on which natural equilibria are based.

In early cultures people were still aware of their encroachments on nature, which is why they tried to reconcile the offended natural beings or gods with various rituals, sacrifices, and prayers.

In antiquity, the first, almost “modern” forms of capitalism were found in the form of the brutal exploitation of people and nature.

The ancient empires were based on violence, ruthless slave economy, and ignorance of nature. (See. "Carthage - the first capitalist state?, under “Economy and Social Affairs”).

Already Plato (427–347 BC) wrote in “Kritias” of the destruction of Attica as a result of the deforestation of its forests, and the Roman naturalist Pliny (23–79) spoke of climate changes as a result of human interference.

The Mediterranean region continues to suffer from this kind of destruction of nature, which began in antiquity, for example through erosion.

In the Middle Ages, deforestation continued in Central Europe and the British Isles. For shipbuilding and metal extraction in particular, more wood was felled than could grow back. Without the discoveries of the great seafarers, Europe, with its increasing population, would have got into serious economic crises.

Millions of people fell by the wayside ...

From the 13th century onwards, with the advent of long-distance trade, the Trade capitalism increasing importance. Initially through the oriental trade in silk and spices. As a result, gold and silver - which were accepted as money on the international market everywhere - flowed to Asia; Europe's economy suffered from a lack of money. 

After the discovery of America, the Spanish and Portuguese colonialists were mainly interested in precious metals. The gold and silver treasures of the Aztecs and Incas in the form of art objects were completely plundered. Then the Indians had to work in gold, silver, mercury and other mines under unbearable conditions. Countless died of malnutrition and exhaustion; the Indian forced laborers soon became scarce and were partly replaced by black slaves from Africa. (Cf. "How Religious Fanaticism Ruined Countries and Empires" in "Short, Succinct, Curious" p. 346 ).

Between roughly 1680 and 1807[ii] The "triangular trade" formed a - typical for capitalist thinking - high point of contempt for human beings:

“In October the ships loaded with firearms, steel and bronze ingots, coarse cloth, glass beads and manufactured goods drove from Europe to the West African coast, where the cargo was exchanged for slaves. After that, from around the beginning of December, the ships headed for the Caribbean, where agricultural products such as coarse sugar, rum and molasses as well as cotton were purchased from the proceeds of the slaves. From April the ships, mostly loaded with sugar products, sailed back to their home ports in order to sell the cargo on the European market at a profit. "
(Quote from "Wikipedia", "Atlantic triangular trade"). 

Very few slaves were captured by the whites themselves. The vast majority were traded by black African chiefs or Arab slave traders. Today the Africans and the Arabs do not want to know anything more about their participation in the slave trade - which was no less criminal - and the media mostly only know about the slave trade of the Europeans. 

A large part of the slaves did not survive the inhumane conditions of the terrible journey across the Atlantic to America. But the profits made with the triangular trade were exorbitant. Despite all the risks posed by shipwrecks, pirates and slaves who did not survive the transport, the invested capital yields interest of 15 percent and more. (See. "The Zong Massacre" under "Strange Stories").

According to recent estimates, a total of around 20 million slaves were landed in America. If one adds the losses in slave hunting and sea transport, a total of 40 million Africans are likely to have been affected by the European slave trade (2, p. 56).

By the way, more black slaves were carried off to North Africa and the Middle East by Arab slave hunters and slave traders in the course of the centuries - in some cases still today - than by Europeans to the "New World". An unheard of blood toll for sub-Saharan Africa.

The Atlantic triangular trade amassed the capital that made it possible to finance the first industrial revolution. (Cf. “An eternal, inevitable facility?” In “Brief, succinct, curious” page 341).

Welfare State USA: Unfulfilled Announcements ... 
In a 1944 State of the Union address, the 32nd President of the United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882–1945), announced an amendment to the Constitution with a catalog of radical social reforms. It comprised: 
• the right to useful, profitable work and the right to earn enough; 
• the right to adequate food, clothing and rest; 
• the right of every farmer to earn enough with his products to ensure a good life for himself and his family; 
• the right of the entrepreneur, large or small, to do business in an atmosphere of freedom; Freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies in one's own country and abroad;  
• the right of every family to a decent home; 
• the right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to receive and enjoy health; 
• the right to adequate protection against existential fears in old age, against illness, accidents and unemployment; 
• the right to a good education. 
“All of these rights mean security. And if this war is won, we must be ready to implement these rights in order to ensure the happiness and well-being of the people. Because without security in one's own country there can be no lasting peace in the world. "  
(From "Capitalism - A Love Story", film by Michael Moore, 2009). 
A good year later, Roosevelt died. After the war had been won in the rush of victory, there was no longer any talk of the announced social reforms.

The limitless accumulation of capital

It is typical of capitalism that a large part of capital can accumulate in a few hands. It is initially irrelevant whether it is about “productive capital” (arable land, factories, machines, buildings, etc.) or - as especially in recent times - money capital.

If the capital is concentrated in a few points or in the hands of a few people, it inevitably has to be absent elsewhere. If you add interest on money - which is forbidden in all high religions - there are hardly any limits to the accumulation of capital. Then capital-rich centers of power develop that have enough influence to steer governments through corruption or violence in their favor.

If this - in the capitalist economy as an inherent part of the system - is not counteracted by legal measures, a large part of the population will have to become impoverished in the long term, while a small, very wealthy clique continually enriches itself. It is not for nothing that the revolutions of different centuries almost always called for a “land reform”, a redistribution of extremely unevenly distributed property. After the Second World War, people in Germany spoke of “burden sharing”.

In recent times, globalization has given capital owners the opportunity to escape government intervention. Some states can be blackmailed by the threat of withdrawing capital to “business-friendly” (ie exploitation-tolerant) countries. This is especially true for monetary capital, which can be sent electronically around the globe with just a few clicks of the mouse and removed from state control.

There are large corporations whose turnover is greater than the gross national product of smaller countries. Important international institutions are on the side of capital. So, to quote Walter Eucken (1891–1950), one of the pioneers of the social market economy, it's not about that 
"To fight the so-called abuses of economic power, but the economic power itself." (6, p. 172).

Idealistic socialists once believed that they could avoid this capitalist poverty trap through a communist state system. But then "state capitalist" dictatorships emerged, sometimes belittlingly called "people's democracies". These worked more uneconomically, but no less exploitative. In addition, they are more oppressive than the “private capitalist” economy.

So far there is hardly a socialist or communist state in the world that has arisen democratically, and the rulers of such states have only been able to maintain their power through brutal dictatorship. Even for colonial peoples, socialism or communism had little good to offer. It is clear that both forms of government and economy - “capitalism” and “socialism” - have a common, unethical root: materialism. (See. "The intelligence ticks left"Under" Economy and Social Affairs ").

Economic or political power without (religious) ethics leads to ruin, as Alexander Solzhenitsyn aptly pointed out: 
“It has been known for centuries that power is poison [...] But for a person who believes in something higher and is therefore aware of his limitations, power is not yet fatal. For people without a higher sphere, power is like corpse poison. There is no salvation for them if they are infected. " (15, p. 148).

The belittling of capitalism as “market economy”, “free market economy”, or even as an expression of “freedom”, which is popular in political Sunday speeches, is not tenable either. The slaveholders of yore were capitalists too and pleaded for a free economy when it served them. Because 
"The total freedom of the market is synonymous with oppression, exploitation and death." (17, p. 153).

Today hundreds of thousands work in bogus capitalist developing and emerging countries under conditions that hardly differ from slavery.

Human personal freedom still had to be enforced by the state; because fundamental human rights stand in the way of capitalist exploitation as well as communist dictatorship!

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) already wrote in the "Social Contract": 
"Between the weak and the strong, it is freedom that oppresses and the law that liberates."

Robbery and looting - using the example of Bangladesh

With industrialization, capital accumulation increased and with it the possibility of using economic and military power against competitors, but above all against colonial peoples. It was now about the state-controlled development of resources around the world.

The indigenous peoples had to surrender their raw materials free of charge, even helping to develop them. Portuguese, Spaniards, Dutch, English, French, Russians, Belgians, Germans, Italians and Americans vied for colonial property and thus for access to raw material sources and sales markets. Local rights didn't matter, and it didn't matter if a colonial land was run down.

The wealth of the industrialized countries came about because colonial peoples had to supply raw materials cheaply and buy industrial products expensively. Entire flourishing economies were destroyed for this one-sided trade, as the example of the plundered Bengal shows: 
Bengal (once "Golden Bengal" or "The paradise of the peoples" called, today as Bangladesh one of the poorest countries) was one of the richest provinces in India. The American scholar Noam Chomsky describes in his book "Economy and Violence" (dtv, Munich, 1995) that the textile center of Dacca in 1741 (the Battle of Plassey, which secured England's rule over India, was in 1757) was vast, densely populated and as rich as the City of London. By 1840, however, it was, “As Sir Charles Trevelyan testified before the House of Lords Special Committee, the population dropped from 150,000 to 30,000 and the jungle and malaria spread rapidly. […] Dacca, the Indian city of Manchester, has grown from a prosperous to a small and impoverished city '. [...] Bengal was known for its fine cotton, which is no longer grown today, and for the extraordinary quality of its textiles. After the British takeover, the British traders' with every conceivable villainy [...] acquired the cloth from the weavers for a fraction of its value ', wrote the English merchant William Bolts in 1772.' The methods of suppressing the poor weavers are numerous and varied. [...] Fines, beatings, incarceration, the enforcement of promissory notes, etc. [...] The fact that trade in Bengal is sluggish, profits are falling and the whole state is so wretched, is due to the oppression and the trade monopolies imposed on Bengal by the English became."
(5, p. 39 f.). 
The fact that things were even worse in other colonies, for example in the Belgian Congo, is only mentioned in passing[III].

New exploitation without military force

After the Second World War, the political situation and the balance of military power had fundamentally changed. Almost all colonies became independent as a result of the colonial rulers' loss of prestige and military power. All attempts to hold the colonies by military force failed.

A fair one "New world order" the plan was under the direction of the UN. If one follows Winston Churchill (1874–1965), this New World Order should seamlessly connect to the violent and inhumane colonial past and preserve the influence of the old colonial countries. (See box "A veil of deception over Churchill's recommendations"). 

"A veil of deception over Churchill's recommendations" 
“When a new world order was established after World War II, Winston Churchill formulated the doctrines that should be followed in enforcing it ... the world should be ruled by the satiated nations who desire no more than they already have. If the government of the world were in the hands of hungry nations, there would be perpetual danger. But none of us would have any reason to want more. In this way the peace of peoples who live in their own way and are not ambitious could be preserved. We could act like rich men who live in peace on their own land. " 
To exercise rule is not only the right of the rich, but also their duty. However, two missing notes should be added. First, rich men are by no means lacking in ambition. There are always new opportunities to enrich yourself and to dominate others and the economic system unfortunately makes it inevitable to take advantage of these opportunities, because whoever comes too late is punished by life. Second, the notion that "nations" or "peoples" act as actors in the international arena serves the usual ideological drapery that hides the fact that there are radical differences in the distribution of power within rich as well as hungry nations and gives privileges. If one pulls the veil of deception from Churchill's recommendations, it is simply that the rich men of rich societies should rule the world, compete with one another for a greater share of power and wealth, and mercilessly suppress all who stand in their way. They receive support from the rich men of the "hungry nations", who are supposed to make their contribution in this game. The others serve and suffer. 
These are all truisms. More than 200 years ago, Adam Smith, the often misunderstood hero of the current triumphal procession, described that the rich follow the "hideous motto of the rulers": "Everything for us and nothing for the others." To achieve goals. "       Noam Chomski (5, p. 91 f.).

Skilled neo-colonialists found a new system of exploitation. This works largely without the use of external military force. With the help of the World Bank, underdeveloped countries are offered “loans to build up the country”, which they often cannot repay with the required interest and compound interest; Especially not when raw material prices rise or even fall slowly, while imported goods such as crude oil or industrial products are becoming more and more expensive. Developing countries are caught in the interest rate trap and are then dependent.

Corrupt elites in these developing countries allow themselves to be bribed. Political pressure and arms deliveries ensure that only those regimes remain at the helm that are acceptable to the rulers of the industrialized countries - in both East and West. A politician from a developing country who does not want to participate in the exploitation of his homeland is then, for example, defamed as a “communist” or counted as part of the “axis of evil”. He can be happy if he isn't murdered[iv].

If you want to read this nasty game - which will stop at nothing - from the point of view of an initiate, i.e. someone who participates in it, they are the ones "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" (13), a bestseller by John Perkins (born 1945) recommended. Here you can find out how the turbo capitalists operate: with one of the most effective systems of all time for the plundering of people and nature.

Recently, the West has faced competition from the emerging new world powers - for example China, India and Brazil - which are taking part in the race to secure resources. China in particular is active worldwide in this area, e.g. with the "New Silk Road" and investments in Africa.
Will this make the treatment of developing countries as suppliers of raw materials more humane?

A capitalist world conspiracy?

As is to be expected in a capitalist system, the gap between rich and poor has grown unbearably in our time. It continues to increase, both between nations and within individual states - even in the industrialized countries.

Josef Stiglitz (born 1943), Nobel Prize laureate, globalization critic and former chief economist of the World Bank, who left this institution in protest against its policies: 
“A growing gap between the wealthy and the have-nots has plunged increasing numbers of people in the developing world into abject poverty, living on less than $ 1 a day. Despite repeated promises to reduce poverty made in the last decade of the twentieth century, the actual number of people living in poverty has increased by nearly 100 million. This happened at the same time when total world income was actually increasing by 2.5 percent annually. " (11, p. 26).

Micheal Moore denounces the conditions in the USA with their "plutonomy" (rule of the rich) in his film from 2009: "Capitalism - a love story".

On the surface, global capitalism looks like a world conspiracy staged by a controlling hand. Corresponding conspiracy theories are then also popular.

Personally, I do not believe that an international gang of industrialists, finance sharks, mafia bosses and politicians - across all ethnic, geographical, political and religious borders - has agreed to bring the world under their power with the aid of the large international institutions. Historical events are not that simple. The managers only do what most people would like to do: earn as much money as possible!

On the other hand, I am convinced that our capitalist market economy is fundamentally flawed. These systemic flaws include the interest-interest system (which all high religions forbid) and the lack of business ethics, as well as the lack of regulation for stock market speculation, etc. In a globalized world, the influence of nation states is declining and they even have to be played off against each other. The influence of supranational, non-democratically legitimized institutions is increasing.

This makes it easy for the malevolent to enrich themselves with nefarious methods that appear like organized crime. Even well-meaning executives feel compelled to "howl with the wolves", that is, to engage in unethical competition with their company, which is often enough fought on the backs of the employees. In today's globalized economy, ethical maxims are regarded as “competitive disadvantages” that no progressive company can afford!

"The end of pure politics" 
“Because capitalism in the true meaning of the word is not how to cram idiots, the accumulation of wealth in the few, or the exploitation of the poor by the rich, or the separation of business and work. These are slurred ideas that come from the gut. There is only one valid definition of capitalism: capitalism is the takeover of government by high finance. At the same time, it is always the end of pure politics. 
There have always been the super rich and poor. This can be due to the weakness of character of mankind, a lack of sense of justice, possibly also to a too rapid decline in intelligence. Accusing the rich of “capitalism” is a common mistake. Wealth that lies in the safe in the form of diamonds is harmless, if perhaps contemptible. But if super-wealth is anchored in the national product, that is, if the people have been maneuvered into the predicament of working for super-wealth in a vicious circle, then the stage has been reached in which super-wealth embodies state sovereignty itself and takes over governance out of self-preservation instinct must in order to bring politics into line with his interests. Then cabinets become shadow cabinets and economic policy becomes sole policy. "                          Joachim Fernau (8, p. 186).

Can it go on like this?

As expected, there is resistance to modern capitalism.

In the 19th century it was the basic writings of the communists, socialists and anarchists that drew attention to unbearable conditions. The main concern was the exploitation of workers in industrialized countries. Political parties and trade unions emerged to address this issue; with success in favorable times.

The oppression or even extermination of the indigenous peoples in the colonies was relatively less perceived. After all, most of the inhabitants of the developed countries benefited - more or less - from colonialism.

For several decades now, globalization has also had an impact on industrialized countries, especially on their working conditions. Jobs that were once well-paid are coming under pressure, and more and more employees are missing a secure, decently paid job, or they feel that they are being used as temporary workers or during internships.

The entrepreneurs point to the increasing pressure of competition. Because the “persecuting countries”, the rising emerging countries, have become competitive in many areas and are putting the old industrialized countries, the “farewell societies”, under increasing pressure. ("The globalization fraud", under “Economy and Social Affairs”).

These unpleasant conditions provide ample material for authors and NGOs (Non Government Organizations) who are critical of capitalism and who come out with sometimes violent criticism of the current world economy. This is how Jean Ziegler, one of the few politically independent and moral authorities of our time, wrote: 
“The murderous order of the world must be overturned. A horde of wild stock market traders, speculators and financial bandits has built a world of inequality and horror. We have to put an end to them. " (17, p. 134).

"Governments act on the stage of the economy" 
“The system of rule that de facto determines our lives, into whose power we are falling more and more, does not rule us de jure, but it sets the key data from which the political leadership must then proceed. This also applies to the regulations, if not even to laws, by which the real control centers of power, the multinational corporations and high finance, are withdrawn from the access of state authorities and generally from any effective control; in truth, it is they who put the state power under pressure and control it. State power, in turn, is split up into the power of the individual states. A fragmentation or limitation that is just as meaningless for the private-sector power groups as state borders. 
Whatever the power of a government, its scope for action and its ability to take responsibility - government action nowadays takes place on the stage of the economy, bills of exchange and production sites. These factors determine the policy of a government, but do not fall within its portfolio. They no longer depend on the government, but they depend on them.            
          Viviane Forrester (9, p. 152 f.).

Has capitalism run down?

Capitalist economies have spread all over the world, including communist China. At no historical time has the economy achieved such growth rates as in the past two centuries. 
"Between 1850 and 1960, Western Europe's economy grew around forty to fifty times faster than the average of the previous 600 years." (6, p. 17). 
Optimists see this development as a trend that has lasted for centuries and will continue despite temporary slumps. Accordingly, everyone will be better and better in the future. These triumphs are particularly attributed to capitalism; the decisive contribution made by scientific and technical innovations is greatly undervalued[v]. The victory of capitalism, which has reached almost every corner of the world, therefore seems total. A unique, hard to beat success story !?

But it cannot be denied that our current economic system is not sustainable without significant changes. It's not just about a sick financial system with speculators gone wild, the over-indebtedness of most states, or a market economy that ruthlessly exploits people; it is primarily about fundamental questions of sustainability.

Because in company balance sheets there may be depreciation for buildings, machines and systems, but nature does not play a role. This will continue to be viewed as arbitrarily usable and infinitely regenerative. Nature has to supply raw materials in unlimited quantities and to swallow waste and exhaust gases in any quantity.

What is needed is a “new industrial revolution”, the decoupling of economic value creation (economic growth) from the consumption of nature. This includes environmentally friendly technologies and the conversion of energy generation to renewable energies (3, p. 59). Much would be possible with decisive action (16)!

"We need a global ethical framework!" 
“The globalization of economic activity will only lead to the general and sustainable prosperity and benefit of all peoples and their economies if it can rely on the constant willingness to cooperate and the ability to cooperate on a value-oriented basis of all those involved and affected. This is one of the fundamental lessons of the global financial and money market crisis. 
The cooperation of all those involved and affected will only succeed reliably if everyone's striving for the realization of legitimate self-interest and for social welfare is embedded in global ethical framework conditions that are generally accepted as just and fair. Such an understanding about globally accepted norms of economic action and decision-making, about an ethos of economic activity, only exists in the early stages. "                       
Hans Küng (11, p. 23).

So far there are only a few, often inadequate, state rules that tame turbo-capitalism and limit the destruction of nature. If action is not taken very soon and very effectively, ruthless capitalists are destroying the physical foundations of their and our existence.

This is where the fundamental design flaw of capitalist mismanagement becomes clear: capitalism is an unethical system in its approach that can at best be tamed a little by laws and rules. Resourceful speculators will always find gaps in the state guidelines and shamelessly use these gaps.

So far, the capitalist market economy has always been able to learn when it comes to increasing profit. Will it in the future be able to incorporate ethical maxims and rate nature-friendly action higher than profit maximization?

Sustainable can only be a natural economic system on an ethical basis, for which there are no concrete role models and which is not even remotely in sight.

It is high time that we found a natural, morally justifiable, ethical economic order!

The American sociologist and critic of capitalism Immanuel Maurice Wallerstein (born 1930) believes that the current capitalist system cannot survive. The situation for the rulers of this world is becoming increasingly chaotic and uncontrollable. Literally he meant: 
"We can be sure that in 30 years we will no longer live in a capitalist world system." 
When asked which system will replace capitalism, he has no answer. 
"It can be a better or a worse system, all options are open." (20).

Through the mass media and the Internet, which is difficult to censor, people learn too much about the destruction of nature, corruption, overindebted states, violations of human rights, bad politics, and unethical behavior on the part of those responsible. One must therefore reckon with the fact that many, very many, will not put up with an inhuman system of exploitation and oppression for as long as they want[v]. Serious environmental disasters are also looming.

The prophesied end of capitalism will neither be the end of the world nor the end of the economy. Even after - perhaps even revolutionary - upheavals, people will continue to live, eat, clothe, live, work, earn money, etc.

Can one hope that those responsible in business and politics will recognize the undesirable developments and find the strength to take countermeasures?

Will the states manage to be “master of their own house” again and no longer allow their policies to be dictated by lobbyists?

Will urgently needed “business ethics” (10) become a global guideline?

Or is the system of enrichment so tempting for a small, very influential elite that it will drive turbo-capitalism to excess and thereby risk its own - not only financial - end?

One thing is certain: there can be no lasting peace without justice! 

You can also read "What kind of social system do we want?„. 

(1) Aubauer Hans Peter et al., Capitalism tamed ?, Peter Lang, Frankfurt a. M. 2010. 
(2) Biermann Werner / Klönne Arno, Kapital-Verbrechen, PapyRossa, Cologne 2005.
(3) Brenner Robert P. et al., Capitalism at the end ?, VSA, Hamburg 2009. 
(4) Chang Ha-Joon, 23 lies they tell us about capitalism, Bertelsmann, Munich 2010.
(5) Chomsky Noam, Economy and Violence, DTV, Munich 1995.
(6) Daniels Arne / Schmitz Stefan, The History of Capitalism, Heyne, Munich 2006. 
(7) Der Spiegel, 49/2010, page 22. 
(8) Fernau Joachim, Halleluja, Herbig, Munich 1977.
(9) Forrester Viviane, Der Terror der Ökonomie, Goldmann, Munich 1998.
(10) Küng Hans, decent economy, Piper, Munich 2010.
(11) Küng Hans et al., Manifesto global business ethos, DTV, Munich 2010. 
(12) Mies Maria, War without Frontiers, PapyRossa, Cologne 2004.
(13) Perkins John, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, Goldmann, Munich 2007.
(14) Senf Bernd, Die blind Flecken der Ökonomie, DTV, Munich 2001. 
(15) Solzhenitsyn Alexander, The Gulag Archipelago, Volume I, Bern 1976.
(16) Weizsäcker Ernst Ulrich et al., Faktor vier, Droemer Knaur, Munich 1995.
(17) Ziegler Jean, How does hunger come into the world ?, Bertelsmann, Munich 2000.
www ...
Criticism of capitalism: 
Ancient triangular trade:

[i] A typical example of this would be the inclusion of the PIIGS countries (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain) in the euro area, against which economists have urgently warned (6). One should also not forget that Germany was the first country to weaken the Stability Pact! Now the euro is in danger as a result.
[ii] In 1807 the slave trade (not yet slavery) was banned in England.
[iii] In the Belgian Congo, the colony in the personal possession of King Leopold I; "During the rubber boom, which ... lasted around four decades from the 1880s to the 1920s, the local population was forced to collect the material for export at any price. The population losses due to abuse, torture, hunger and disease were so high that for every ten kilograms of rubber exported, one person had to pay with their life. So shockingly little was a human life worth in the Congo at the time that by the end of those four decades the population had shrunk by 70%." (Peter Frankopan. "Between Earth and Sky", page 642). 
[iv] Jean Ziegler mentions Thomas Sankara, the head of state of Burkina Faso. The welfare of his people was more important to him than the interests of the capitalists. He was murdered for this in 1987. (17, p. 118 f.). Another example is Patrice Lumumba (1925-1961), President of the Congo, who was also murdered.
[v] As is the typical saying: "The technician is the camel on which the merchant rides to success."
[vi] All those responsible are strongly advised to read the history of the French Revolution. Also the script that was hostile to politicians "The Coming Uprising"that can be found on the net is a serious warning signal! (