By David Robb ——Bio and Archives--January 21, 2024
American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Roots: Capitalism is an ancient economic system whose origins are lost in the mists of history. It has proven to be robust and reliable in the face of war, famine, natural disasters, and pestilence. It has resisted attempts by tyrants and governments to eliminate it or at least modify it to suit their interests, and has proven itself resistant even to deliberate hostility.
Socialism, on the other hand is a relatively recent innovation. While a form of it existed almost two thousand years ago, at least in the form of sharing of resources, its ideological underpinnings are less than two hundred years old. A form of it was even tried by some of the first settlers in this land—the Pilgrims. The experiment then, as with every other occasion where Socialism has been attempted, was a dismal failure.
Why, then, does Socialism continue to enjoy such popularity? Why does such a successful system as Capitalism which has enriched the world by lifting innumerable peoples out of poverty currently enjoy such hatred and opprobrium? Why does Socialism, with such an appalling record of failure wherever and however it has been tried enjoy such an enthusiastic following, and spread so widely and easily?
One of the most significant problems with Capitalism is that it is reality based. Its functioning does not rely on ideology, altruism, forced participation or any other artificial element. The essence of Capitalism is based on fair exchange between participants where one party provides something of value to another, and the receiving party provides compensation according to their own valuation of what is received. If the parties cannot agree on valuations, then the transaction does not take place. This free exchange of value is the basis of Capitalism.
Socialism, on the other hand relies on a third party to establish value independent of provider or receiver. Even if the provider is unwilling, they can be forced to provide goods or services at a rate set by the third party, and the receiver will be forced to accept those goods or services regardless of how they might value them. The receiver provides their compensation to the third party, and not to the original provider. The transaction is implemented by force or threat of force by the third party. In most cases, the third party is the State.
Socialism is often presented as an equitable system where the power of the State will be used to extract goods or services from those who are represented as having more than their "fair share" and then distributing the extracted value to other, more deserving, recipients. It preys on the envy, anger, and resentment of those who feel they have not received what they covet and what they rationalize as their due. They welcome a strong intermediary who will adjust matters in their favor, to right imagined wrongs, and ultimately to produce a society that meets their perceived standard of fairness.
In some cases, Socialism is supported by those who have amassed great wealth, perhaps as a way of atoning for their greed, or perhaps as a way of buying adulation for their "generosity", a generosity that consists mostly of depriving others of the fruits of their labor for distribution to those who have not earned those fruits.
The threat of force ensures that those who feel legitimate resentment at having value taken from them against their will cannot oppose such taking, and buys the support of those who receive such appropriated value. Since takers tend to greatly outnumber makers, especially in Socialist societies, the State often finds great support, at least initially, for their redistribution activities.
However, in such societies where the concept of "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" is implemented, people rapidly learn to exhibit as little ability as possible, while expressing as much need as they can muster. In such conditions the Socialist state steps in to assign productive tasks to every individual regardless of ability or interest. This is done to ensure that production is maintained at some minimal level necessary to support the population. This minimum level is generally at that of basic survival and results in most of the population in what would be considered poverty level. Only an elite few who have power to coerce others prosper under Socialism.
Support Canada Free Press
This is an inevitable condition resulting from basic human nature. Some States have realized this and have attempted to modify human nature to fit the needs of the State. This has been done through propaganda, social pressure, "re-education", and even through elimination of dissenting elements in a Darwinian process. The closest that Socialism has come to working is in the Chinese Social Credit system. Even there, it has been necessary to introduce significant elements of Capitalism, and we have yet to see if it will survive over a longer term.
Although Capitalism is primarily an economic system, it promotes and depends on particular social conditions where it will function best. Among these are a strong respect and support for private property, a fair system of justice and rule of law, and recognition of the value of individuals and personal rights.
It is individuals that create the wealth of goods and services that provide value to others. It is a legal system that defends and supports the rights of those individuals to engage in productive activities, and to be free from coercion, theft, or State appropriation, and it is respect for property that enables individuals to reap the rewards of their labors. To the extent that these elements are expressed and supported in a society, that society will prosper.
Socialism, on the other hand, considers that the worth of individuals is in their value to the State. Those who serve the State best are rewarded, while others serve mostly as sheep to be shorn, or cattle to be slaughtered; of value only collectively.
While in most forms of Socialism businesses and productive enterprises are nominally owned by individuals, in reality they are subject to the direction and control of the State. This allows the State to take credit for any successes, while having a convenient scapegoat to blame for failures. Property can be taken by the State at any time where people are simply caretakers who can be removed at State whim.
Even law serves the State. Whatever the State desires is enforced, and "justice" is whatever serves the interests of the State. Laws that are enforced for one group are ignored for others. This preserves a state of anxiety and fear among the people that helps to keep them under control, as they never know what to expect or when they might be accused or punished.
There is much more that could be written, and indeed, has been written about Socialism and Capitalism. We can summarize though by saying the Capitalism supports the individual and the free exchange of real value among individuals. Socialism supports the State at the expense of the individual and takes from some to give to others without recognition of value provided nor received.
Capitalism has proved over centuries to be a fair and equitable system that recognizes the value of individual contributions and provides fair compensation for value provided. Wherever it is supported and encouraged, societies flourish.
Socialism, in whatever form it has been implemented and by whatever name it has been called denies the value of the individual and only recognizes the value of a collective - essentially a herd. Value is extracted from individual labors without compensation, and provided to others to secure and perpetuate the State. Wherever it has been established, societies fail.
The excuse for such failure is often that Socialism has not been properly implemented and that if it had been done right, it would work. I would counter that if Socialism is so fragile that it must be precisely implemented and practiced in order to work, then it is too fragile to survive.
Yes, Capitalism can be abused to provide advantage to some at the expense of others, but what is considered abuse in Capitalism is often routine practice under Socialism. Capitalism will repair itself. Socialism just keeps on doing until it dies.
Do we want a reality based system that values the individual and produces a wealthy society, or do we prefer a fantasy that promises heaven on earth but delivers only a hell filled with poverty and misery? The choice is ours.
Choose wisely.
View Comments
David Robb is a practicing scientist and CTO of a small firm developing new security technologies for detection of drugs and other contraband. Dave has published extensively in TheBlueStateConservative, and occasionally in American Thinker.