Eye opening considerations convincingly presented here. There are aspects of capitalism that at least initially support personal freedom, productivity and democracy and aspects of socialism that seem hard to enforce democratically. I don’t know if a happy medium exists that can largely avoid domination and oppression by either the rich and powerful or by the state. I kind of doubt any political or economic system has the capability of creating anything close to a utopia. The question is how to maximize prosperity and minimize suffering. The political advantage of free market strategies is that the benefits can come immediately and the “bill” may not come until later. If some form of real socialism is the answer, then people must be convinced that it can be realized without being excessively overbearing, if that is possible.
I plan to go into greater depth on this subject, but I think the answer lies in the application of technology, being realistic about our current phase of development (i.e., how much have we automated away work? what level of scarcity exists?) , not losing sight of the protection of personal liberties, and something akin to “market socialism”.
Socialism is an institutional arrangement and mode of governance. Freedom is for liberals and religious type people. It’s not for socialism. The socialist social contract is based on “mutually agreed upon coercion for mutual benefit.”
I think a good socialist project would be one in which the means of production are publicly owned, there are limits to property rights, and there is a planned income distribution. The economy should be based on cooperation, not competitive markets. Economic outcomes should be coordinated and equitable. Governance should be based equity, inclusion, and environmental sustainability. The economy should be governed to work for the benefit of everyone as a whole. (The whole economy should be a public good.)
Eye opening considerations convincingly presented here. There are aspects of capitalism that at least initially support personal freedom, productivity and democracy and aspects of socialism that seem hard to enforce democratically. I don’t know if a happy medium exists that can largely avoid domination and oppression by either the rich and powerful or by the state. I kind of doubt any political or economic system has the capability of creating anything close to a utopia. The question is how to maximize prosperity and minimize suffering. The political advantage of free market strategies is that the benefits can come immediately and the “bill” may not come until later. If some form of real socialism is the answer, then people must be convinced that it can be realized without being excessively overbearing, if that is possible.
I plan to go into greater depth on this subject, but I think the answer lies in the application of technology, being realistic about our current phase of development (i.e., how much have we automated away work? what level of scarcity exists?) , not losing sight of the protection of personal liberties, and something akin to “market socialism”.
Good article. Here is my 2 cents.
Socialism is an institutional arrangement and mode of governance. Freedom is for liberals and religious type people. It’s not for socialism. The socialist social contract is based on “mutually agreed upon coercion for mutual benefit.”
I think a good socialist project would be one in which the means of production are publicly owned, there are limits to property rights, and there is a planned income distribution. The economy should be based on cooperation, not competitive markets. Economic outcomes should be coordinated and equitable. Governance should be based equity, inclusion, and environmental sustainability. The economy should be governed to work for the benefit of everyone as a whole. (The whole economy should be a public good.)
I’m working on a model that details these ideas.