[Mr. Big]

Hi Sonart!

"Methinks you're being somewhat self-serving in your definition of "fundamental human nature". "

I don't recall ever defining human nature, I only said that a part fundamental to it is self-interest.

"Fundamental human nature also includes the fact that human beings are social animals, and that we have survived and thrived in nature by banding together in cooperative, harmonious social groups."

We truly are social animals, but I am not sure this has determined our survival and success. To some degree, if evolution is correct, being a social animal has served some survival function, but I would argue that we have come to "thrive" (i.e. dominate "nature") because of our capacity to think in abstract ways, and to think about the future. You don't see zebras in domination over nature as humans have come to dominate, despite their herd mentality.

"And that, too, is, at bottom, from self interest. It's in our self interest to cooperate with each other, to treat each other in a mannerly fashion, to work for the benefit of the community, etc. etc."

First, in capitalism you see this type of behaviour; firms cooperating can achieve a larger profit than they would if they were to try to destroy each other. Two examples of this this off the top of my head are the petrol-chemical companies before the industry died due to government regulation, and television networks during the 80s and 70s. Extra profits that companies can make by gouging customers is the reason there are laws against collusion. All this being said, your argument doesn't work.

"Indeed, humans are also ambitious, acquisitive, imaginative, and self-centered, so extreme 'pure equality' driven economic systems like communism will seem restrictive to many, if not most. That doesn't mean that the other extreme -- 'survival of the fittest' libertarianism -- is the answer."

To what question? All I have said is that capitalism is the best system that fits with human nature, and the best social system should be one that caters to humans' true nature.

"Our liberal government evolved because Americans as a group decided they didn't like the robber barons, child labor, company stores and dangerous working conditions of unfettered capitalism combined with the advent of modern industry and technology."

Very debatable. But anyways, I don't see how this is a counter argument. Perhaps you can clarify.