People who know me (or at least those who have read my facebook), would know that I support Socialism. Most idiots people tend to link socialism with communism, which is partly true in theory, but absolutely not in practice. I shall now begin by clarifying terms for whoever reads my blog in the first place.
First we must distinguish what socialism is; socialism is a form of economy, not government. Meaning that a socialist nation can coexist with a democracy, a republic, a parliament, and so on. Ideally, there are only two forms of economy: socialism and capitalism. Of course there is also a big difference between modern and classic socialism and capitalism. We shall first define these two.
We shall start with the classics. Think of two villages; in each village, every resident produces a certain amount of food; some produce less, some produce more. In one village, when you produce food, that food belongs to you; you can decide for yourself if you would like to eat it, give it to the poor, and so on. This is what is we refer to as classic capitalism.
In the second village, however, each citizen puts all the food they grow in a big community basket. Whenever a citizen would require food, he would simply take as much as he needs from the basket and go on his merry way. This is what is referred to as classic socialism.
One main similarity between the two is that they both deal with the distribution of wealth. This is because, back in the old day, people did not have such complicated ideas of ownership; objects belonged to someone; whether it be the king, your neighbor, or even your son. Which is why they were more focused on the distribution of wealth due to the fact that certain unalterable causes like nature, could force some people to be able to create less then others, although effort would still be maximized (forces such as drought, fertility of land, etc)
Now we move on to the modern point of view of these economic systems. Modern capitalism still retains most of its classic ideology; if you work more you get more. This would be true in certain jobs where either you work on a client basis (lawyers and doctors) or you work under a quota basis. Of course there are jobs that have you working as much as you can under a certain amount of time, and yet still receive the same amount of income. The modernisation of this theory lies in the ownership of a company/corporation. In capitalism, the most common type of ownership is a corporation. In this system, a company can be bought piece by piece by selling what they refer to as shares. Owning a share entitles you to a certain percentage of the company, allowing you to make decisions on the company, and receive interest depending on how much you invested. This amount you have invested is reffered to as “capital” (hence the name, capitalism). These corporate owners can do pretty much whatever they want with the company so long as the other shareholders agree, and they do not cross over the bounds set by the government.
Now we move on to modern socialism. Modern socialism, as portraed as its so-called father, Karl Marx, like modern capitalism, also refers to the ownership of a corporation. In this case, a corporation is no longer owned by people who put in a certain capital into a corporation, but is owned by the people. “The people”, in this case, can either refer to the government, who directly represents the people, or the workers themselves. In most modern socialist nations, only necessities such as hospitals and schools are owned by the people, in which case, the government, which would ideally make theses services free to any taxpaying citizen of that nation. Corporations that deal on minor things such as technology, clothes, and restaurants, are, in most modern socialist nations, given a capitalist nature; they just let it be run the capitalist way. This would create an amalgamation of socialism and capitalism, which is evident in many recent socialist nations (excluding the former USSR and China, I believe) Although, in theory, there is libertarian socialism, which involves the workers being the ones who would own such a corporation.
If you would notice, modern socialism does not necessarily follow the ideals of classic socialism. Classic socialism is mostly referred to these days as communism, because it pays all people equally, therefore distributing the wealth of a nation equally. This is where most people make the mistake of equating socialism with communism. According to Marx, socialism is ideally a tool to slowly convert a capitalist nation into a communist one, since people do not easily accept change, though this is not necessarily the case in all examples of socialist nations.
Now that we have set aside the main differences between capitalism and socialism, more importantly, how they are used in the modern world, I shall now explain why I support socialism. This is, after all, my blog. Anyway, like most of my preferences, I do not simply choose something because it is better; I choose something because I dislike the other alternative. So the correct question now is why I dislike capitalism.
Firstly: Capitalism is pretty much similar to a closed system. How do you get rich? Two ways. First you can get a really good job. This requires good education, which requires, in most case, a large sum of money. Point in case: you need money to get money. Secondly, you can join a business. To do this, you can either start your own business by having a great idea, and having enough money to start this business, or you could invest in another business by buying stocks of a corporation which requires, well, money. Point in case: you need money to get money. There are indeed rare cases and “underdog stories” wherein the marginalized are able to rise up to the challenge and make a fortune, but, as stated, these are rare.
Secondly: Capitalism is a socially concentrated system. Let us take the example of what we would call a “corporate lemming.” These people work their asses off the whole day, have to deal with the stress of a demanding superior, and end up with the higher-ranking jobs going to younger employees despite spending years in a corporation. It all ends up with how well you interact with your peers, and more importantly, your superiors. My point in this example is that capitalism, which should reward you with your capability, is, instead, rewarding with how well you interact with people. Admittedly, this is not always the case. Of course those who are extremely capable are eventually rewarded. But I ask you; who gains more money? A scientist or a business owner? A doctor who saves hundreds of lives a year, or the owner of the hospital he works in? If capitalism indeed rewards people with their capability, then why is it that sports heroes and actors gain more money than people who revolutionize technology? It is because capitalism is social; the more well-liked you are, the more money you get.
Thirdly: The only form of control for capitalism are the law and competition; and competition is the more reliable form of control. Let’s face it, we all know that when a company releases something new, its competitor will attempt to obtain your interest by introducing their wares for less money. It is as simple as that. Like stated before, capitalism is socially-oriented; if your company makes things for cheaper, then you would be more well-liked, therefore entailing the corporation with more customers. But what of monopolies? In these cases, the only form of control is the law, which can be, at many times, flawed. Sure, people could rebel against the monopoly, but if it is a necessity, eventually, they will come crying back (if you have watched enough episodes of The Simpsons, you would see Montgomery Burns as a perfect example for this)
My reasons could go on, but these are my main points. So why do I support socialism? Because it is not capitalism. Because you do not need money to get rich since in socialism, education would be free, and in some cases, you, as a worker, would be given equal opportunity in your corporation as everyone else. Because socialism is already controlled by the people, it no longer needs competition to regulate the economy. And because socialism would be run equally by the people, you would not need to impress others with social quirks, but focus on productivity and skills, in order to gain more income.
The biggest problem that socialism faces, both in modern and classic, is that it requires a certain amount of determination from the people. Capitalism’s main point of determination is money, and, in our current society, most people would be determined towork for more money. In socialism, money is only a secondary point of determination. In order for it to succeed, it would need people to not only think of how it would get them more money, but people would need to think how it would help enhance society. Social in socialism not only refers to the fact that it is owned by society, but also because that it works the best when the whole society works towards a greater society, not only a greater individual.
2