Tell a socialist that you are not a socialist, and they might assume you are a capitalist. Tell a capitalist that you are not a capitalist, and they might assume you are a socialist. Without such pettiness and philosophical ineptitude, neither economic framework would ever be embraced for its own sake, after all! Blended versions of both are ignored by the blind proponents of either system, as to even admit that economic systems can be more nuanced than simple capitalism or socialism would already contradict the petty assumptions they make and fiercely but irrationally cling to.
Indeed, assumptions must be made in order to go from having a subjective preference in favor of capitalism or socialism (if one has a preference on the matter at all) to believing that it is logically or Biblically necessary to uproot all traces of either general approach to economics. One must analyze the concept of each one in the light of reason, ignoring or sidestepping popular misconceptions that foolish people come up with as needed, in order to see that either broad approach could have the consent and support of the people who must live under it and either approach could be structured in a tyrannical, unjust way.
Neither capitalism nor socialism is inherently predatory or inherently helpful; all harms or benefits of either system always stem from the manner in which they are set up. Capitalism can lead to prosperity and innovation, but it can also lead to exploitation of the poor and the gratuitous glorification of the rich. Socialism can help protect certain lower class members in times of dire financial urgency, but it can also be used to redistribute wealth without the consent of those whose resources are taken even when they have not obtained their wealth in an illicit way. No economic orientation towards free markets or the erasure of the lower class as a category will deliver people from the possibility of being abused in the name of money.
No one has to be a capitalist or a socialist to be rational. On the contrary, it is fallacious to insist that either economic system is obligatory on its own, as that is unprovable at best, and it is also irrational to think that either system is intrinsically built on cruelty and theft. Either one can be implemented in different ways that allow for different priorities. With capitalism pursued with concern only for profits and social recognition, misery is the outcome for anyone who needs to participate in the system but does not crush others in the process. With socialism pursued simply for the sake of equalizing wealth to the point of merging all economic classes by default, misery is the outcome for those whose economic status is manipulated for the worst no matter what they do.
There are far more important things to both the abstract and practical sides of human existence than mere economics. No one needs economics or social communities to discover and explore logical truths. No one needs economics to ultimately eat and survive, as there are methods of growing or obtaining food that have nothing to do with work, currency, or the collective wealth of formal property. No rational person would ever pretend like economics is the foundation on which all of philosophy and practical life hinge, for only logic could have this status. The centrality of money and other economic factors to modern life does not make capitalism or socialism necessary in the way that reductionistic fools might insist.
No comments:
Post a Comment