There have been a few threads in the past few days that have ended up in debates between these two systems.
I'd like to share my thoughts on the subject.
Keep in mind, that at 22 years old, my outlook is still developing and seems to change daily.
When I first became politically interested, in 2008, my initial leaning was toward the left. I thought for a while that our society would be best
served by nationalizing some key industries: banking, health care, energy. In the aftermath of the economic collapse, I was convinced that the private
sector could not be trusted in such a consequential industry such as banking/finance. I agreed with the Health Care Act, and figured that many more
people would be able to receive treatment without threatening to cripple them financially. I saw many instances of environmental abuse, and thought
that the energy sector may be better served by a command style shift toward environmental protection and alternatives to oil.
When reading the US Socialist Party Platform
, I find myself agreeing with the majority of
ideals. I thought that the fastest way to higher wages, lower prices, high employment, widespread health care, affordable education, peace, and
environmental responsibility was aggressive government action.
But during the past four years my thinking has changed some.
I still agree completely with this type of sociology. Educating everyone, access to health care, support for the struggling, etc. But now I believe
the means of achieving this are best done in a different manner.
When imaging the ideal society, the perfect communist state and the perfect capitalist state are essentially the same. The difference is in the
communist state, all social and economic changes are legislated. They are mandated.
So, I think I was hypnotized by the hypothetical promises offered by the socialist...and further the communist model. The issue is that humanity in
it's current state seems not capable of this type mutual responsibility. In communist countries, power gets concentrated in the hands at the top of
the chain in the same way we see in nations with capitalist economies.
What is needed is a change in ethics, and I believe this is better achieved within the capitalist, free market system.
In a socialist country there would be a highly graduated tax system and generous social programs aimed at liberating the poor, administrated by a vast
It would be better, and more authentic, if the rich used their wealth to help the poor within their freedom.
When attempting to create a better society, it is much better for a people to gradually advance their ethic and morality than for such practices to be
Socialists/communists look at a state like America and see all the wealth, productive capabilities, and resources to drastically raise the quality of
life for a huge portion of the population. It follows that by instituting a government that follows this type of morality, great goals can be
The fallacy is that there is no reason to think the people in government are any more capable of a higher morality than people in the private
The answer to our issues, in my mind, is to one by one hold ourselves to a much higher ethic. Even if you have little disposable income, most have
disposable time. Volunteering and doing community service is the capitalist response to a government with an increasing social reach. If the private
sector does not prove itself to be capable of taking care of each other, then the argument against collectivism is not so strong.
If the middle class were more charitable, the upper class would have to be as well. We need to raise the standard of social responsibility within our
freedom, before that freedom is lost.
There is a growing dissatisfaction with the wealthy coming from a lower class that really isn't much better. The general population has it within it's
power to demand better companies, better communities, and better government.
Since 2008 I have reversed by position on nationalizing these industries. By doing so people give up their power to the Capitol. It would be more
authentic progress if health was prioritized within communities and localities, and care was approached from a preventative standpoint.
People are capable within their capitalist freedom to increase local production in food, energy, and goods of all kinds. A business owner is capable
of sacrificing some profits to provide a few more jobs and better benefits to people in the community. Education costs can be driven down if more
people volunteer and participate in the learning process of the local children.
I still agree with all the ideals of a socialist/communist society, besides the legislative means of achieving them. I do think the wealthy should
sacrifice more of their income to provide jobs and security to the working class. I do think we need to be more environmentally responsible.
But if these goals are not achieved by a free progression of ethics and standards by which we hold ourselves at all levels of society, then the
outcome will be illusory. Corruption will plague those in power, until there is a mass change in conduct motivated by an authentic desire to be better
I'd love to hear feedback on that little essay. I'm sure my thinking wasn't fully expressed, and any additions or discussion is appreciated....as I
said my outlook is developing, and any one of you may change my mind or even inspire me to the point of epiphany.
edit on 12/10/2012 by PatrickGarrow17 because: typo