Obviously we will post many current events and what not, but before i started discussing anything going on or not, i feel the need to bring up capitalism, i was reading Johnny's myspace, and saw his disgust with capitalism, i didnt really need to read that to know, i could of assume he had some displeasure with it, i am going defend such economic system...obviously i will get feedback so i will take into account the comparison of socialism...
I will start by breaking down socialism
as you know it is as a general, characterized by the public ownership means of production. central planning, and the distribution of goods without a profit motive
capitalism is an system in which there is private ownership of means of production, the pursuit of profit, and free market competition..
living in our society, you do not understand its basic tenets, capitalist believe that market forces should be determined by both product and prices, profits are good for humanity, peopel will strive for profits, it stimulates them to produce and distribute goods efficiently as well as to develop new products..
in contrast you feel profit is immoral, the only way to show profit is to pay workers less than their labor, profit therefore is the excess value that has been withheld from the workers, you feel that the government should protect workers from exploitation, to do so, it should own the means of production, using them not to produce profit, but to produce items that match peoples needs, not their ability to pay..
your primary argument is that it leads to social inequality, that there is a tiny top layer cusp of wealthy, powerful people who exploit the masses, (poorly paid workers), you state that this top layer wields vast political power, those few own the means of production and reap huge benefits, and in turn are able to get legislation passed usally against pulbic good..
in turn..
socialism does not respect the individuals right, a govermental body controlling the peoples lives, deciding where there is work, where schooling, i.e china decides how many children may bear. Central planning is so grossly inefficient and that there is really poor chance of producing much wealth, not only (GDP) but in the sense of stimulating the economy
i fall somewhere in between these lines..obviously Johnny and Mike (wherever they are) are upstanding citizens and are only lying to themselves if they say they do not exist among a free interchanging capitalistic society, and that their own profit pursuit is euqally shared..i feel that the convergence theory is essentially what makes most sense on an off paper, if you were to look at the last century of failed communist states its not hard, in a sense i can sit here and list miserable failed communist regime in which millions were killed, and exploited, soviet union, vietnam, cuba, china...and so on, these regimes were not what mr marx/engels had envisioned obviously..it is a fantasy economical system that cannot freely exist in this world, yes you can look at states that have had favorable chance, such as Sweden ,Denmark but these socialistic states are democratic in nature but are converged, Vladimir Lenin, an example of a successful marxist run, russian revolution (2nd one), was successful..yes, but once things were moving throughtout, Lenin had to establish a New Economic policy mixing capitalistic ideals into, China is doing the exact same thing so it will not choke itself...
i feel the ideals expressed by socialism are very favorable and i agree with them, but if were trying to establish what will work with reality it is impossible its pretty on paper but fails in reality...yes yes things are bad in the united states and i can go on for hours about our medical system that needs more than a facelift, but we encorporate many mixes, medicaid, food stamps, welfare, unemployment compensation, subsidized housing, social security, a mininum wage, a hybrid mix is perfect..china and russia in the 1980s and 1990s were producing shoddy goods and lagged behind the west, they had to reinstate market forces, they made private ownership of property legal, they auctioned off state own industries. Even Vietnam has embraced it..it is impossible not to understand its potential, yes there will be poors, people underpaid, a rich elite, the poor establish many jobs for people, just by being poor..i know weird right? i can give you a whole peice on that, or you can read Herbert J. Gans paper on the poor, not explaing their sitation or proposing reform, but the uses of poverty: the poor pay all, what i am saying is that realistically, to prosper, to make profit, to have the freedom to do what you want with business or the pursuit of capital, is left in a capitalistic society.
i lean to many of socialism beliefs, but its failed time and time again, and will, men cannot avoid free will, jealousy, loss of motivation and there greed...a hybrid mix would do a better job aiding society, yes we have many problems but if we can move on from our current healthcare system i feel things may improve...
much love
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Understandable points, its obvious that capitalism or a mix between that and socialism is the only equation thats worked thus far (communism obviously hasn't been given its fair share, the countries that have tried it weren't what Marx/Engels had in mind). But in my opinion capitalism is running the human race and the earth into the dirt, quickly. As much as it works, its something that by nature expands. And that expansion has left a lot of things in the dark (wildlife, environment, the worker that runs it, etc.). I realize that the other options take pretty much an overhaul of culture and understanding to function, something that has not yet been realized. But we're coming to a point in history where the current system of capitalism either needs to shape up or ship out. Its something that by nature lacks regulation (or wants to). But the climate is changing, people are growing tired of living in poverty (not because they cant work, but because their labor wont give them a living wage), and as a species this is all we have to say for ourselves? This is our accomplishment? Communism isn't getting rid of capitalism, its transcending it. Socialism is the transition period between the two.
Frankly, communism isn't possible yet, people are too greedy and we still have resources on the earth that can be exploited, so I mean its not viable. But when those resources run out everything is going to collapse and its not going to be pretty.
Right now concern should be placed on getting rights for workers and getting them a living wage, because thats something that can be accomplished. Changing an economic system is a tad larger of a project and in my opinion wont be realized until we're staring into the face of eminent extinction (and we're getting there).
"Few will doubt that humankind has created a planet-sized problem for itself. No one wished it so, but we are the first species to become a geophysical force, altering Earth's climate, a role previously reserved for tectonics, sun flares, and glacial cycles. We are also the greatest destroyer of life since the ten-kilometer-wide meteorite that landed near Yucatan and ended the Age of Reptiles sixty-five million years ago. Through overpopulation we have put ourselves in danger of running out of food and water. So a very Faustian choice is upon us: whether to accept our corrosive and risky behavior as the unavoidable price of population and economic growth, or to take stock of ourselves and search for a new environmental ethic." -E.O. Wilson
I see what you're saying definitely James. Maybe a Socialism-like economic system is simply wishful thinking at this point in time with the current state of affairs in the world but I'd still like to believe that it is possible, however improbable it may seem. And just because it hasn't worked in the past, or that it may seem impossible to actually get an honest and good alternative to capitalism up and running doesn't mean attempts shouldn't still be made.
There's a pretty good alternative to Capitalism that I've been reading up on, it's called Participatory Economics (or Parecon for short). If you feel like doing some reading then here's a site that compares and contrasts Capitalism and Parecon: http://www.zmag.org/parecon/capvsparecon/html/ownership.html
Good words.
Post a Comment