I was at a small party last night and one of my coworkers was there and he pressed me for the details of my political views.  Among mixed company and informal contexts, I resist being drawn into these conversations, but he insisted, and I explained that I am a capitalist.

Before I got to illuminate what I meant by that, he asked me if I thought a socialist system could work anywhere.  I said no.  And he pushed more asking if I thought perhaps merely people hadn't designed a system in which socialism would work.

I'll tell you what I told him: absolutely not.  And it is only to the extent that an economic system resists socialism that they are able to function for any period of time.

Aside from being completely immoral, socialism does not work.  There is no way to make it sustainable.

The facts that resources are finite and that wealth can only be generated through labor are fundamental aspects of reality that must be accounted for by all economic systems.  That there is a limited amount of any given economic value is referred to by economists as scarcity. 

Capitalism is the only economic system that properly recognizes these facts and addresses the issue of scarcity.

Socialism, in contrast, pretends as if scarcity is a non-issue and that in order to accumulate wealth, people need only ask for it.  Aside from being a horrendous insult to the human mind and appallingly stupid, it's hideously destructive.  No one would applaud if someone drove their car through a day care because they insist that's the way to their house, and yet there are lots of people cheering for socialism even though it leaves consumption unchecked, spreads poverty, and violates our most basic rights.

The economic ruin that socialism brought to Russia in the 19th and early 20th century is a prime example of what happens when a post-industrial economic system converts to socialism.  Millions died.  But if unsatisfied by this precedent, China's economic stagnation and overwhelming poverty relative to the size of its population should be enough to convince anyone with half a brain.  Even the present day economic woes of many African nations can be traced to a fundamental lack of individual property rights, which is the distinguishing aspect of socialism.

Some people argue that communes and co-ops are examples of functional, sustainable examples of socialist principles in action.  They certainly bring more or less determination to the notion, but casual examination always reveals them to be obnoxious and revolting.  Some of them sell their goods to bring wealth into their system -- remember: socialistic systems always consume more than they can produce on their own -- and none of them offer even the most remote potential for a lifestyle of luxury and comfort to which one aspires in a civilized society.

It's difficult to overstate how devastating and fundamentally impractical socialism is.  Can socialism work under any circumstances at all?  No, it can not.

Posted by: Flibbertigibbet at 12:35 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Category: Money, Money, Money!
Post contains 501 words, total size 3 kb.