Debate: Capitalism vs socialism



Debate: Capitalism vs socialism

|Which is the superior system, capitalism or socialism? |

|Background and context |

|[pic] |

|Capitalism is the world’s dominant economic system. Within it, the means of production and distribution are owned by individuals: private |

|ownership and free enterprise are believed to lead to more efficiency, lower prices, better products and rising prosperity. Socialism advocates|

|the ownership and control of the means of production and industry by the community as a whole: the community is believed to be both more just |

|and more efficient through central planning, or participatory planning. In Marxist theory Socialism represents the stage following capitalism |

|in a state transforming to communism; for many, however, it is a goal in itself. This binary view of potential political and economic systems |

|may be thought simplistic, but it is a debate that is extremely common. Necessarily, many other systems are not touched upon. |

|Broader philosophies: What are the opposing philosophies of each system? |

|Yes |No |

|Socialism run by central bureaucracy, not "the people" Michael |In socialist systems, society is ruled by the collective people. |

|Telzrow. "Socialism's broken promises." New American. December |Under socialism, society is ruled by individuals collectively |

|25th, 2008: "In truth, the working classes had much to lose |working together toward a common purpose to enhance the |

|under socialism, and for later generations the shackles of |collective good. Socialism also promotes democracy, |

|communism would weigh heavy; for in practice, a central person |self-management, solidarity, equity and other positive social |

|or group had to control the redistribution of the wealth, and |benefits as well as greatly increases prosperity and equality |

|under communism power was concentrated for the benefit of the |(see the section on decision-making for more detail). This |

|few at the controls — at the expense of the masses, no matter |compares favorably to capitalism, where society is ruled by |

|the harm and the suffering visited upon the masses." |corporations and their pursuit of profit and power. |

|Socialism over-trusts government bureaucrats Milton Friedman: |Capitalism does not guarantee societies needs. This is because |

|"Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good |social costs, and everything that affects third parties in a |

|intentions of those who create it. [...] The power to do good is|transaction, are externalised (see discussion of market prices |

|also the power to do harm."[2] |later in debate). This means that social needs and costs are not |

|In capitalism, society is rightly ruled by individuals. Only a |reflected in pricing. As a result of this, the needs of society |

|given individual can assess what is to his benefit or detriment.|are ignored in capitalist society unless they are profitable - |

|Capitalism places responsibility for an individual's prosperity |which they usually aren't due to the externalisation of social |

|in his own hands. Socialism attempts to determine an aggrigate |cost. The pursuit of profit, that is necessary under capitalism, |

|good defined as "the good of the collective" and apply that one |also promotes anti-social behaviour, punishes solidarity and |

|"shoe" to all "feet". |means that all winning takes place at the expense of other. |

| |In capitalism, businesses must put profit before everything else.|

| |In a system (capitalism) with a built in need for growth and |

| |expansion (on every level) based on profit and on a level of |

| |competition such that every company that fails to achieve a level|

| |of growth and expansion on par with its competitors will go out |

| |of business, it is entirely intuitive that businesses can ONLY be|

| |about making profit and expanding - everything else is secondary |

| |to that goal. |

| | |

| |In capitalism, profit is made through exploitation. There are |

| |many ways that exploitation is used bring profit in capitalism. |

| |The first is through the exploitation of the workers by the |

| |capitalist class. This was first described in Capital by Karl |

| |Marx and has yet to be disproved. Infoshop (an anarchist |

| |information website) describes this process (the extraction of |

| |surplus value from workers) quite succinctly: "Under capitalism, |

| |workers not only create sufficient value (i.e. produced |

| |commodities) to maintain existing capital and their own |

| |existence, they also produce a surplus. This surplus expresses |

| |itself as a surplus of goods and services, i.e. an excess of |

| |commodities compared to the number a workers' wages could buy |

| |back. The wealth of the capitalists, in other words, is due to |

| |them "accumulating the product of the labour of others."" |

Debate: Communism

|Is communism a sound political philosophy? |

|Background and context |

|[pic] |

|Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means|

|of production. It is usually considered to be a branch of socialism, a broad group of social and political ideologies, which draws on the |

|various political and intellectual movements with origins in the work of theorists of the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution, |

|although socialist historians say they are older. Communism attempts to offer an alternative to the problems believed to be inherent with |

|capitalist economies and the legacy of imperialism and nationalism. Communism states that the only way to solve these problems would be for the|

|working class, or proletariat, to replace the wealthy bourgeoisie, which is currently the ruling class, in order to establish a peaceful, free |

|society, without classes, or government. The dominant forms of communism, such as Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, Trotskyism and Luxemburgism, are|

|based on Marxism, but non-Marxist versions of communism (such as Christian communism and anarchist communism) also exist and are growing in |

|importance since the fall of the Soviet Union. |

|Property: Is the communist perspective on collective ownership of property appropriate? |

|Yes |No |

|Liberal democracies should ensure a degree of "equality of |People have full rights to their property that governments |

|outcome" A principal 20th century liberal theorists, John Rawls, |shouldn't deprive. Governments violate the rights of citizen when|

|originated the idea of a the "veil of ignorance". The idea is |they force, or threaten to force, individuals to transfer their |

|that, imagining we all had no idea how we would "come out of the |legitimately held wealth to the state in order to provide for |

|womb" and whether we would be "advantaged or disadvantaged", what|pensions, to help the needy, or to pay for public goods (e.g., |

|kind of social contract would we construct. We would want to |parks or roads). Individuals have a natural right to life, |

|construct one in which we minimized the risks to ourselves if we |liberty, and property. Depriving any one of these rights |

|happened to get the "short-end of the stick". This is why a |diminishes the others. Therefore, these rights must be considered|

|degree of "equality of outcome" is important. Communism and |inviolable. They are important to uphold for their own ends, not |

|socialism recognize these ideas. |merely for other expediencies. Therefore, no matter what the |

|Society must collectively own many form of property through |cost, the individual right to property must be upheld as an |

|government - Benjamin Franklin - "All property, indeed, except |absolute. A socialist government would not uphold this right. |

|the savage's temporary cabin, his bow, his matchcoat and other |"Collective" Ownership is an ill defined concept Whatever |

|little Acquisitions absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, |rhetoric may be used, the fact of ownership of property is having|

|seems to me to be the creature of public Convention. Hence, the |control over the use and disposition of said property. When one |

|public has the rights of regulating Descents, and all other |speaks of "collective" ownership one is really speaking of |

|Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the quantity and |government ownership. As a practical matter then the |

|uses of it. All the property that is necessary to a man is his |representatives of the state then grant usage of property to |

|natural Right, which none may justly deprive him of, but all |individuals who then effectively own it. The real question is |

|Property superfluous to such Purposes is the property of the |whether individuals will gain the use of property through the |

|Public who, by their Laws have created it and who may, by other |exchange of their own productive labor or if they will gain its |

|Laws dispose of it."[1] |use through political influence. Communism is simply a newer |

| |atheistic form of feudalism with divine right of kings replaced |

| |with political right of the commissars. |

|Economics: Is communism economically beneficial? |

|Yes |No |

|Past fears of government programs bankrupting society proved wrong |Government merely defends the interests of the rich against the poor |

|"1935: Social security will break small business, become a huge tax |Adam Smith - "Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the |

|burden on our citizens, and bankrupt our country! |security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the |

|1944: The G.I. Bill will break small business, become a huge tax |rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those|

|burden on our citizens, and bankrupt our country! |who have none at all."[2]. It is likely that this would happen with |

|1965: Medicare will break small business, become a huge tax burden on |communism. |

|our citizens, and bankrupt our country! | |

|1994: Health care will break small business, become a huge tax burden | |

|on our citizens, and bankrupt our country!" | |

|Motivation: In a communist, society, would people by motivated to help others? |

|Yes |No |

|Many could be motivated to work by a wish to aid their fellow man. |The drive to succeed as an individual is the strongest motivating |

|Over time, as the benefits of this better way of life become obvious, |factor a human being can feel in their work. When work is uncoupled |

|all will. The impulse to share wealth and material amongst the |from reward, or when an artificial safety net provides a high standard |

|community, to support all, leaving none behind, is one of the purest |of living for those who don’t work hard, society suffers. The fact that|

|mankind can experience. It is not merely possible – it is a |individuals are driven to succeed is in all our interests |

|demonstration of the progress of our species to a finer, more humane | |

|state of being. | |

|Can communism help the less wealthy? |

|Yes |No |

|Shared wealth will mean more wealth for the less wealthy. If |Communist states often oppress dissent. This would not be good for the |

|wealth is shared the lower class will receive a fairer and high |emotional well-being of the population. |

|share of a nation's wealth. |Communism will destroy the economy. By restricting the activities of |

|Helping the less wealthy is the intention of communism. |individuals the economy will collapse. This means that there will be poverty |

|Communism was founded on the idea of helping the less wealthy so|for everyone. |

|it seems obvious that communism can help the lower class. | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download