Mohit wrote a comment on my short post yesterday that I feel the need to respond to.
If one had to try and summarize the problem with Capitalism in one word, it would be 'exploitation'. Marxism was born out of this anguish, but as the world has figured out, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The history of communism is a detailed account of the replacement of exploitation by the capitalists with exploitation by dictators and despots. Socialism was supposedly the golden mean - a democratic process for electing the government that would then manage the welfare state, presumably by taxing the rich to care for the poor. Save for a couple of Scandinavian countries, this approach has not really worked. The problem with socialism, can also be summarized in a word, and that word would be 'entitlement'. France, a poster child of the success of socialism in the seventies and eighties, is these days crippled by strikes at the SNCF with alarming regularity. The French are beginning to find even a 35 hour work week onerous. The number of people who live on the dole in a number of socialist-democratic countries across the world is worrisome, but nowhere near as worrisome as the number of people who actually aspire to live on the dole.
On the other hand, unbridled Greenspan-ian Capitalism produced the financial crisis of 2008 - a clear exploitation of the system by the few who didn't know what they were really doing, but knew that they could get away with it.
The devil and the deep blue sea then? Not quite. I would like to argue that the situation has changed sufficiently in the 21st century to favour choosing Capitalism over communism. Two factors are markedly different today as against in the early 20th century when Marxism took root.
One is the far higher literacy level among the populace, at least in the countries where the choice between Capitalism and communism is real. It is far more difficult to exploit a literate educated people than it is to exploit those whose thumb print can be forcibly affixed on a document. A signature forced under duress can be disavowed in the court of law, at least in places with a reasonable rule of law. The illiterate person is unaware of his rights within the law, let alone willing or able to fight for them.
The other factor is the loss of exclusivity over published material that used to be vested with the capitalists. Our maid has a smartphone and she is on facebook. She knows she has a say, and she is empowered to voice her opinion. Internet and social media are making it easier for her to learn that she has a right, an obligation even, to voice her opinion. For the first time in the history of mankind, vox populi is not muted, cannot be muted by external forces.
Capitalism today has to tread carefully to survive. In a dictatorship of the proletariat, you have to tread carefully to survive. Where would you rather be?
Capitalism is the deep blue sea. It is unpredictable and will throw the odd storm at you, but you are free to chart your own course. Communism, the devil, unfortunately has been unerring in its behaviour thus far.
2 comments:
Adding to your point, I believe communism is tyranny. It breeds complacency and below average standard of living in the community due to poor rewards and recognition. This is where incentive comes in.
Incentive based systems are more powerful and thought provoking. They encourage innovation, zeal and drive towards excellence. In capitalism, even if a minority has access to property or free enterprise, the majority serves them. This stems from ‘fear of losing purchasing power’. But what matters here is, the individual will go to work daily and ‘earn’ what he deserves based on his skills or efforts. He will be rewarded in proportion which will motivate him constantly and bring a sense of achievement. This in turn helps the greater good by way of higher production, newer technologies and thus, above average standards of living.
As against this, communism uses people as a tool for the greater good. It doesn’t give them individualism wherein they can work for themselves in order to earn their bread the way they want. Working for the society lacks accountability and develops insecurity among the working class as to whether their efforts are fructifying. ‘Ek aadmi ke kaam nahi karne se kya pharak padta hai’ creeps in. Overall, the community starts depending more and more on the government for their lifestyle whereas the government itself is crippling them. A case of chronic Chutzpah. This results in lack of innovation, low productivity and thus, below average standard of living.
Hello Ketan,
Thank you for your comment.
I agree completely with your point of view. One of the maladies afflicting government departments in India is that their employees treat their jobs like it was a dole.
Thanks once again for taking the time and effort to post your comment.
Post a Comment