Dear Democrats,
I see that, for the first time, a Gallup poll has found that
more Democrats prefer socialism than capitalism. (See https://news.gallup.com/poll/240725/democrats-positive-socialism-capitalism.aspx)
Do you really understand that which you are preferring?
I suspect that everyone is at least somewhat familiar with
the former U.S.S.R. While we liked to
refer to it as a communist country, it was indeed socialist. Is that truly what you are looking for? And, please don’t tell me that socialism here
would be different – it would not. The
people who turned to socialism in the Soviet Union, like many of you, believed
that it was for the good of all the people; history shows us how that turned
out.
Let’s consider. Here
are the primary characteristics of a socialist economy:
1. Public Ownership. Also
known as collective ownership, this means that the all forms of production and
distribution are owned, controlled and regulated by the state (the
government). The basic motive of the government
is not to profit, but rather to meet targeted objectives – objectives that
those in power have determined are in some way appropriate.
2. Planned Economy. Again,
the state will control and plan all economic activities including production,
exchange, distribution, and consumption.
Laws of supply and demand do not apply.
The theory is that because the state is solely responsible for the
distribution of wealth that society as a whole will prosper.
3. Classless Society. Everyone
will theoretically have an equal economic status.
4. State is responsible for basic necessities of life. The basic needs of life are promised by the
state. These needs include: food, shelter, clothing, health, education,
employment. The details of each of these
needs are again left to the state to determine.
5. Equal Opportunity. While
there may not be equality of income, the state will guarantee to provide equal
opportunity by considering the skills and ability of each individual to
determine their success in such a way as to deprive no one of their basic
needs.
6. Non-existence of competition and limited choice of consumer
products. Because the state has full control
over production of goods and services there is an absence of competition in the
market. Because the system is focused on
life necessities, choice in consumer products will be limited and confined to
the essentials.
7. Pricing Mechanism. Pricing
will be controlled by the state; this includes both market pricing and
accounting pricing which underlies decisions about production of consumer and
investment goods.
I can understand how this might sound good on first
blush. Words and phrases like “classless
society” and “basic needs provided to all” along with a “planned economy” where
“society as a whole will prosper” all
sound lovely. How wonderful that everyone will be provided
equally with food, shelter, clothing, health, education, and employment.
Or, is it really so wonderful?
Let’s look at how those basic necessities were provided in
socialist Russia. I assume you are all
aware of the bread lines and the meager existence of the Soviet citizenry. Three generations of family living in a three
room (that’s three total rooms, not three bedrooms) apartment. Smaller unrelated families required to share
living space. Employment determined by
the state. Education primarily focused
on indoctrination to the party ideals.
And, while everyone may have been provided those basic necessities,
though in limited quantity and quality, one cannot really argue that the
society was classless. Those in power lived
very differently from the masses.
I do think that the idea of socialism is in large part
built on compassion. One sees one’s
fellow humans suffering and wanting for the basic necessities while others seem
to have more than they could ever need. One wants to help. One wants to allow everyone to thrive. But, consider whether, despite all its
glowing rhetoric, socialism is really the best way.
In socialism, it is really the state that thrives. The individual simply becomes a tool of that
state, supporting it and those few that are in power.
Let’s consider how a capitalist economy differs.
1. Private Ownership. Unlike socialism the means of production and
distribution are primarily under private control. Generally, there will be limited taxation and
minimal government mandated labor policies as well as those designed to ensure
employee safety and protect against unfair hiring practices.
2. Free Market. Individuals
and businesses compete for profit. The
underlying principle is “survival of the fittest”; that is, those that offer
the best products and services for the lowest prices while maintaining a high
level of profitability will usually survive.
The free market follows the law of supply and demand and will be
responsive to the needs and demands of consumers.
3. Two classes. Historically,
capitalist economies are split between two classes of individuals: the capitalist class that owns the means for
production and distribution of goods, and the working class who sell their
labor to the capitalist class in exchange for wages.
4. Little or no government interference. While an ideal capitalist economy would have
no government interference, in reality there will be minimal laws and
regulations on certain industries. The
government will not usurp the individuals‘ rights and abilities to make their own
decisions as to what they need and what they want and as to how best to fulfill
those needs and wants.
5. Power of the individual. The
entire production pattern of capitalism is based on the desires, wishes and demands
of the consumer. Individuals are free to
make their own choices as to how to use their skills and what to do with their
profits. Every individual is independent
to his means of production in any occupation that one likes. Self-interest rather than state interest will
allow the individual to determine how and how hard to work, and will allow maximum
income to be earned based on decisions and demands of individual consumers.
6. Choice. Producers and
consumers are free to make decisions rather than having decisions made for them
by the state.
7. Willingness to change. Capitalism
has the ability to adapt and change. The
willingness to allow change and the adaptability of societies to improve
inefficiencies within economic structures is important as societies evolve and
is currently especially important in the area of technology.
Capitalism does not have so many pretty and compassionate sounding
phrases as does socialism. But, let’s go
below the surface and consider that ultimately the difference is about the
respect that one has for each person’s right to determine his or her own
destiny.
In the end, socialism concludes that the individual is incapable of surviving,
let alone deciding how to survive, without the state. It sees the individual as a child who needs
the state to act as parent, making all life decisions for the individual. It
will feed and cloth the individual as it sees fit, not as the individual might
like. It will provide the care that it
determines is appropriate. It will
decide how the individual should spend his or her life, both working and
leisure life. And, in order for the
system to work, the state will demand complete loyalty from the individual. Individual desires, hopes, dreams,
aspirations become meaningless as all walk the path determined by the state.
In contrast, Capitalism respects the individual. Yes, that can have some harsh consequences. We all make bad decisions from time to time
and, sadly, sometimes a bad decision may truly affect the rest of our
life. Sometimes we are placed in
situations where we simply cannot make the decision that we would like. Even in an ideal capitalism where everyone
was faced with identical opportunities and abilities, the results of how each individual
would handle those opportunities would differ, and ultimately place some in less than desirable positions.
Our very noble human compassion wants to stop the hurt that can come
with a capitalist economy. But,
socialism is not the answer. The answer
is not to take away our individuality or to demean individuals as incapable of making
decisions. The answer is not to give the
individuals’ power to the state.
The answer is to work to improve the existing imperfections of
capitalism, not to throw out the proverbial baby with the bath water and dump
capitalism for socialism.
So, dear Democrats, I urge you to turn away from socialism’s seductive
siren song. Instead of being seduced by
some power structure that would strip us all of our individual freedoms, listen
to all the many individuals and their diverse needs and wants. Help those individuals to see where changes
in our society can strengthen our individual determination and responsibility
to make a better world in which the individual, not the state, controls his or
her own destiny. Capitalism, not
socialism, provides the democratic economic structure in which this can take
place.
No comments:
Post a Comment