> You can forbid people from axe murdering their neighbors. What is special about "being capitalistic" that makes it unforbiddable?
Murdering someone is an act; "being a capitalist" isn't. Forbidding "being a capitalist" is like fighting thoughtcrime. You can forbid certain actions that seem "capitalist", but that's not a free society anymore.
My definition of "free" is simple: able to do anything you wish, as long as you're not hurting anyone (in general, I mean hurt physically). I'll agree that the definition of "hurting" gets complicated in practice: in a competition, the losers could claim the winners are hurting them by winning (in fact, in the economic competition we all live in, that's exactly what is happening).
> You can forbid certain actions that seem "capitalist", but that's not a free society anymore.
Why not? If we can agree (and I doubt we can) that certain "capitalistic actions" do in fact hurt people, does that not make it possible to forbid capitalistic actions without losing abstract aspirations of freedom?
> My definition of "free" is simple: able to do anything you wish, as long as you're not hurting anyone (in general, I mean hurt physically).
To me, this reads, "able to do anything you wish, as long as you can get away with keeping others from proving you directly hurt anyone". We're actually pretty okay with people hurting each other in this society, because freedom is more important to us than human beings.
Let's do a fairly standard capitalistic action: constructing a building. This is a generally uninteresting conversion of capital, through some risk, into developing property to produce more capital. Can we ever forbid this? Does that restrict freedom? Does it hurt anyone? How can you really tell? The Law of Wheaton works fine for internet conversation, but it's woefully inadequate when discussing political philosophy.
You never really answered what "non-capitalist" means to you. That was kind of a more important question.
Murdering someone is an act; "being a capitalist" isn't. Forbidding "being a capitalist" is like fighting thoughtcrime. You can forbid certain actions that seem "capitalist", but that's not a free society anymore.
My definition of "free" is simple: able to do anything you wish, as long as you're not hurting anyone (in general, I mean hurt physically). I'll agree that the definition of "hurting" gets complicated in practice: in a competition, the losers could claim the winners are hurting them by winning (in fact, in the economic competition we all live in, that's exactly what is happening).