cm0002@infosec.pub to People Twitter@sh.itjust.works · 21 hours agoCapitaleftisminfosec.pubimagemessage-square124fedilinkarrow-up1397
arrow-up1397imageCapitaleftisminfosec.pubcm0002@infosec.pub to People Twitter@sh.itjust.works · 21 hours agomessage-square124fedilink
minus-squareMattBlackAlien@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·19 hours agoYou can make a very good argument that it was Adam Smith, with Wealth of Nations.
minus-squareFishFace@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·14 hours agoIt was influential, but capitalism had essentially already come about in a limited form.
minus-squaremindbleach@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up3·16 hours agoAnd his stated goal was competitive markets forever, not absolute monarchy with more steps. People dunk on conservatives by quoting that book.
You can make a very good argument that it was Adam Smith, with Wealth of Nations.
It was influential, but capitalism had essentially already come about in a limited form.
And his stated goal was competitive markets forever, not absolute monarchy with more steps. People dunk on conservatives by quoting that book.