Insight Blog

Perspective, Tech Stuff, Leadership

insight - the capacity to gain an accurate and deep intuitive understanding of a person or thing.

What is better - Capitalism or the Alternatives?

Posted on 26 May 2019
Category: Politics
Author: Steve Vail


Throughout history from the earliest records of the earliest known civilizations, great governments and kingdoms have risen and fallen. Many of them have victoriously conquered others only to later find themselves being conquered by another. While the idea of an evolved utopian-like society (or world for that matter) where bullies and would-be conquerors are non-existent is very appealing, I'm afraid it's also untenable and a pipe-dream at best.

There are those among us, however here in the good old US of A, that believe if you give the government enough control and power, they (the government) via their awesome benevolent nature (I'm being sarcastic) will bring about or at least speed up the evolution toward the aforementioned utopian-like society. Wow! somebody has been watching way too much Star Trek - a show that I have watched and enjoyed. As I stated before, the idea of such a society is very appealing, but I am also acutely aware of the fact that it can and will only come to fruition in the world of make-believe.

How do I know this to be true? My answer is People are people. Regardless of where they come from, their race, creed, religion, etc.. People are people, and throughout history, there is no indication that mankind has evolved or is ever going to evolve beyond where he was two hundred thousand years ago (random number). I conclude, therefore, that governments, which are man-made will always behave as they always have behaved. The old adage, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," can easily and appropriately be applied here.

So let's take a look at some of the arguments coming from the other side. Just to be clear, when I am speaking of "the other side", I am referring to those that are of the mindset that government can and should be trusted more than any part of the free enterprise system of capitalism.

    Here are a few of their most common arguments:

  • Just look at the gap between the wage earnings of the very wealthy and the average citizen, and it just keeps growing.
  • Look at how several of the CEOs of companies that went belly-up during the financial crisis of 2008 walked away with millions while the employees of the companies they were running lost everything.
  • Capitalism is evil! Greed is at its heart and core.
  • There is only so much money and wealth in the world, and as the rich continue to get richer, the rest of us will certainly get poorer.

    My response to the above arguments:

  • Compared to the rest of the world, what is the average US American citizen's quality of life? I dare say it's good, if not very good or even great.
  • If a US American citizen so desires, does he have the freedom to change his quality of life? The answer is yes, he definitely has the freedom as well as ample opportunity and incentive to do so.
  • If capitalism is so evil and the US of A is such a horrible place, then why do so many people from all over the world want to come here and make it their home?
  • The elusive, overly dramatized wage earning gap argument is an enigma that has been used by every socialist group wishing to overthrow their government since the inception of socialism by Marcs and Lennon. If it weren't so alarming, it would actually be comical.
  • While capitalism has its faults as does every economic system that has ever been tried, at least it provides an opportunity (regardless of how small or minute) for each and every individual to take control of their own destiny. This simply is not the case within either the socialist or communist economic systems. I recently stumbled upon a video that I believe clearly and accurately depicts the differences between Communism, Socialism, and Capitalism. To view it click here.

    In both communism and socialism, there is no incentive for anyone to go beyond or attempt to achieve more than the bare minimum of what's required. I have a hard time believing that anyone would consider that to be a good thing. Only by seeking out opportunities to grow and go beyond the status quo can we continue to progress as a society. Yet it's the so-called progressives that by promoting their socialistic ideology are actually advocating stagnation at best or worse, the complete opposite of progression. So help me here - how is that progressive?

    Another thing that I find very alarming at this point in history, is that the extremely wealthiest people of the world - that small handful of multi multi-billionaires - are advocates bound and determined to see socialism become the only economic system worldwide. They also tend to favor an abolishment of national borders, which to me also translates into an abolishment of national sovereignty (I digress. I'll save that topic for another time.) So now I have to ask myself... why are they promoting socialism? Is it because they want to even out their status with the masses by a re-distribution of their own wealth? If you believe that to be true, I've got some prime real estate in the Mojave desert I would like to sell you at a huge bargain. Obviously, these extreme wealthy types know something that the majority of those espousing socialism do not know. Because I don't believe for a second that they have any intention or inclination toward becoming any less wealthy than they are at this present time. Honestly, I believe their intention is to progressively become wealthier by the day - just as they have been doing from the time they made their first million dollars and became intoxicated by the power and prestige it gave them. So how do you think socialism will help them achieve this goal? The answer is simple. Competition among businesses only exists within a capitalistic economic system. in a world where only socialism is tolerated, those who have already amassed tremendous wealth will continue to acquire wealth without competition or regulation. You may retort by saying, "Oh no, the socialist government would not allow that", and I would have to answer by saying, "You're joking right?" THEY WILL OWN THE GOVERNMENT - THEY WILL BE THE GOVERNMENT, and we will be their subjects.

    Wake up people! These extreme wealthy types of the world advocating socialism and abolishment of national sovereignty only have their own interest and self-promotion in mind - regardless of what it might mean for any and/or everybody else.

    I'm going to conclude by saying this. If you are opposed to what I have written here, I'll make a deal with you. If you can show me irrefutable evidence that even one of these multi multi-billionaires espousing socialism has given (not intends to give, but has given) even half of their net worth to the less fortunate of the world, I will retract everything I've written here and publically re-consider where I currently stand concerning my views of capitalism, socialism, and communism.

    As with anything I have written, I welcome differing opinions, open discussion, and debate. However, if you just want to call names and attempt to incite an emotional response, save it - I will simply delete your comment, and that will be the end of it.