We know that too much private control doesn't work, and history has proven that humans cannot reach Marxism because of capitalist propaganda telling them so and the possibility of a dictator or a strong government taking over. But there's no need to say "It's one or the other." If I had been given the power I would make the world a mix of the two extremes (Probably more left leaning.) I would leave fundamental things people don't really need to get by for the most part, like Wal-Mart for instance, in private control; however areas that involve meeting basic fundamental human needs such as health care, oil, electricity, education, welfare, law enforcement and perhaps a few big car companies should be controlled democratically by the workers and/or the government. If some people don't like the state funded institutions such as educational facilities or health insurance they always have that option to choose a private investor. As a famed socialist here on AG, I do not call for private schooling and health care to be completely abolished, I just advocate the government making sure that every citizen can benefit from health care and education regardless of the amount of wealth they enjoy. Those who say âI donât want the government telling me I need health care, I want to choose whether or not I want it!â are undermining millions of people that need but cannot afford, or have difficulties affording, a trip to the hospital. As I said, if some people want to trust their health and family education with private companies, then they have a right do so. Itâs just like how public schooling is mandatory however everyone can choose to put their kids in a private school should they feel the need to. Socialism strives to set a new standard of living for the nationâs workers and the less fortunate citizens.
More people have jobs? Everyone gets food and shelter? Where are you getting that information from?
For one thing, good luck finding a truly communist or truly capitalistic society. I'm not the biggest history buff, but I'm not aware of ANY nation being purely communist since the inception of the idea. Nations seem incapable of really getting there, possibly because the idea simply doesn't work on any kind of large scale. These days you have China with their "Special Economic Zones"...
My opinion? People will flirt with all sorts of ideas that sound good and righteous and noble. Then people figure out what actually works, and what do you see? More capitalism, less centralized power.
We know that too much private control doesn't work
Can you provide me with one concrete reference of a truly private market failing? Emphasis on TRULY. Companies buying government officials to get favorable legislation passed doesn't count.
To the OP... if I had to choose between one or the other extreme I would side with the one we've actually seen - I'd scarcely call the U.S.S.R. an accurate representation of how communism is supposed to work, nor China, or any of the other countries that have called themselves 'Communist'.
If we're crunching pure 'theory' and not historical representation, communism seems far more entrenched in ideality & would be the better choice.
If we're crunching pure 'theory' and not historical representation, communism seems far more entrenched in ideality & would be the better choice.
I think it's a lovely sounding ideal that is essentially very naive about the way people are. As long as self preservation remains a root instinct of human beings, I think communism will not be realized. Altruism has developed alongside self preservation instincts as a way to maintain strong community on more of a tribal level. But evolutionary speaking, this historically still boils down to an us/them mentality... our tribe vs their tribe, making one collective gene pool stronger against another in the midst of limited resources.
Capitalism doesn't have pretty ideals. But it works pretty well, because it plays off the idea that, overall, peoples' drive for self preservation reigns supreme. And unless we were to tamper with our very genes, our very course of evolution, this isn't going to change.
Communism is perfect...in theory. Everyone takes what they need, and everyone gives what they can. Sounds perfect.
In reality, people are lazy and greedy. If someone can get away with giving a little less than they can and taking a little more than they need, they will. It's human nature. Then the government steps in and decides how much everyone needs, and you get totalitarianism.
That only proves capitalism doesn't work without adding socialism to the mix.
Allow me to make a similar statement.
"Our transportation system has never used purely electric vehicles powered by fuel cells. That only proves that an electric transportation infrastructure doesn't work without the addition of oil-based transportation."
I do agree with you though in the sense that some government regulation is required. I read a quote somewhere that "ure capitalism only works in a purely ethical world". In fact, I think the same thing could be said about pure communism, and I wonder at how distinct the pure forms of these ideals would really be in practice.
The difference between me and a lot of people is just how minimal I like government presence to be. When I make a legal agreement with someone, and they break it, government needs to be there to enforce their word. I also think the government needs to be at the head of projects which are by there very nature nation-wide in scope (national defense being a prime example).
I believe these "impurities" are the main things required to keep the gears moving smoothly.
I am, however, an optimist with a large amount of faith in the everyday individual's potential to manage themselves and treat others decently. This is a purely subjective position and i won't blame anyone for disagreeing with me on this.
In theory communism should work it has no reason not to but in practice it is dead except for North Korea they should of collapsed decades ago. I'm pro communist.
"Our transportation system has never used purely electric vehicles powered by fuel cells. That only proves that an electric transportation infrastructure doesn't work without the addition of oil-based transportation."
Do you see the flaw in this reasoning?
But that's not an economic system with people in it and huge corporations.
