Thoughts About Socialism From A Capitalist Lickspittle

Merriam-Webster defines socialism as:

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods”

2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

  b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Occupy protesters defend socialism, which they've
never experienced against a former Soviet citizen who has.

I had a pretty good idea that my understanding of socialism was correct but I decided to look it up just in case my memory had been corrupted by capitalist ideology. I was interested because there is so much talk about the benefits of socialism and even more demonization of capitalism these days. Even France, which turfed the socialists out a few years back, has embraced the socialist ideal once again and it seems like a good time to review the accomplishments of our socialist brothers and sisters.

Socialist countries can be divided into two basic groups. The first is comprised of countries which embraced Marxist-Leninist theory and generally are called communist. The second is made up of countries that mention socialism in one form or another in their constitutions. Let’s take a look at how they’ve done compared to capitalism over the past century.

Of the the original 31 communist countries, only 4 are still in existence. China, which is the largest of the four, is actually in transition and has allowed forms of capitalism to emerge.

Of the 32 countries that mention socialism in their constitutions, only 8 continue to try to live the socialist ideal.

As a point of information, there have been an additional 35 short-lived political entities that didn’t survive long enough to be recognized as legitimate governments.

In other words, from a political and governing perspective, socialism has a pretty low batting average. It has been tried in a total of 98 countries but it would appear that it has had only a 8.6% survival rate. Even more interesting, most of the former socialist countries eventually embraced capitalism and it isn’t all that difficult to see why. Capitalist democracies have a significantly higher success rate and not just in terms of mere existence.

Lets put aside the obvious stuff like suppression of civil rights like freedom of assembly and free speech for a moment and consider the great accomplishments of socialism in the world. How many of those accomplishments came from socialist countries compared to those that came from capitalist democracies?

In terms of education,  almost all of the world’s leading universities are found in capitalist countries. Only Peking University (ranked at #46) made it into the top 50. Universities like Harvard, MIT, Oxford, McGill, ETH Zurich and the University of Edinburgh all made it into the top 20. The United States, arguably the most capitalist country in the world had no fewer than 13 of the top 20 universities followed by Great Britain. Even Canada, with McGill University, is ranked ahead of China.

Some may like to point to the University of Hong Kong but the university built its reputation during the years Hong Kong was a crown colony of Britain’s and the former colony has been allowed to pursue much of its capitalist activities since becoming part of China.

The simple fact is that socialism has failed miserably when it come to advanced education. Too much emphasis is put on controlling what people learn rather than allowing people to explore ideas freely. Even many of the elite in socialist and former socialist countries sent their children to universities in capitalist countries which doesn’t say much about their faith in the educational system they set up.

Socialism hasn’t been much more successful when it comes to medical science or healthcare either. In the rankings of the world’s best medical centres, only one socialist country, China, makes it into the top 50. The United States, by contrast, has 30 of the world’s leading medical centres.

It makes sense when you think about it. There is a definite link between education and medical research and those countries with superior universities and considerable economic private-sector resources have been responsible for almost all of the world’s major medical breakthroughs. Again, many of the elite in socialist countries have often shown a preference for being treated at medical facilities in capitalist countries.

By any form of measurement, including life expectancy, socialist countries barely make the cut. Of the top 50 countries with the longest life expectancy, only two socialist countries made it onto the list.

It doesn’t end there. If you’re reading this, you can thank capitalism. It was, after all, capitalists who developed almost all of the technology we take for granted including: smart phones, iPhones, the iPad, laptops, along with most of the software and the apps we use every day. There aren’t very many Steve Jobs, Mark Zukerburgs or Bill Gates in socialist countries……if any.

Capitalism provided not only the technology but the millions of jobs that were required to develop, manufacture, sell, support and update that technology.

Capitalism provided most of the consumer products that enhance our lives, some trivial, some less so. Capitalism provides choice. Where capitalist countries offer Lexus, Chev, Mercedes, Mazda and countless more, socialist countries developed the Jugo.

Capitalism provides manufacturing jobs, small business development opportunities and expanded government services. Where capitalist countries provide opportunity for creativity and rewards for achievement, socialism stifles the drive for success and the will to achieve.

Capitalism is far from perfect but it has one basic difference with socialism. 

Capitalism believes in the individual while socialism believes the individual must exist for the benefit of the state and must conform to the collective. The problem with that theory is that it is contrary to human nature. 

We exist as individuals first. We all have hopes, dreams, talents, ideas and goals. Capitalism accepts that all have equal value but recognizes that not all have equal talent or motivation. Socialism believes that all should share equally regardless of ability or effort and creates a parasitic society where those who won’t feed off of those who can. 

Capitalism allows those who are motivated and who strive to succeed to achieve some if not all of those things. Socialism is not interested in the individual or his or her ideas or goals. In socialist states, the individual exists for the benefit of the collective; in capitalist states, individuals are allowed to exist for themselves.

I know and believe that capitalism is imperfect and there is a significant amount of greed and corruption in the capitalist system but the the same can be said of socialist societies as well. It doesn't take long for the elite in a socialist society to set up a different standard of living for themselves compared to that of 'the people'. (Greed, unfortunately, is also part of human nature and it does have to be checked for the benefit of a society.)

The primary difference between the two is that despite its flaws, capitalism has allowed for the development of almost all of the major advancements in our lives while socialism can lay claim to nothing. It seems to me that if you are going to embrace an approach to making the world a better place, you fix the one that has a proven record rather than hoping that the one that repeatedly fails will somehow magically work this time.

I believe that those who are most disadvantaged should  be helped and not in the lip-service way of social activists. There is no excuse for 41% of men in the United States to be unemployed nor is there any justification for a child to go to bed hungry in a wealthy country. 

But, considering what has been accomplished by capitalism when compared to what has not been accomplished by socialism, perhaps it would make more sense to work together to refine the fundamental of capitalism rather than to continually promote the benefits of failed socialist theories that sound great in the classroom but have proven to be unworkable, oppressive and unsustainable in the real world.

Perhaps it’s time to stop arguing over ideology and start accepting that providing a proper social safety net requires a successful society, not one that is so in debt it can’t pay for the services it already provides. Perhaps it’s time to recognize that the only path to a successful society lies in encouraging the productivity, the creativity and the perseverance of the individual.

And that my friends is what capitalism, for all its faults, is all about.

As the failed attempts by more than 75 former socialist countries has proven, there is no such thing as a free lunch and it is long past time that the sanctimonious, the envious, the lazy and the idealists put that day dream aside. It seems to me to make more sense to try and fix the broken parts of a successful system than to cling to the proven delusion of a failed one.

Perhaps it is long past time to stop fooling ourselves and start dealing with reality for a change.

RELATED


World's best universities
http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities-rankings/top-400-universities-in-the-world?page=2

World's Hospitals
http://hospitals.webometrics.info/top2000.asp

Top 50 life global expectancy rates
http://plus50lifestyles.com/countries-life-expectancy/

© 2012 Maggie's Bear

all rights reserved

The content of this article is the sole property of Maggie's Bear but a link to it may be shared by those who think it may be of interest to others