: But under feudalism, innovation was again more effective than under despotism. Social systems evolve, and with each step on that evolutionary ladder, innovation has so far taken one step with it.
I don't think this is true. Didn't the Church torture an kill scientists who threatend to upset their worldview? We call these times the Dark Ages because innovation was stopped.
My point here is that innovation is *not* guaranteed to get better with each century. If we choose the wrong system, we can find ourselves moving backwards. I can find nothing in any description of Socialism to suggest that it would be better at innovating and much to suggest it would be much worse.
:However, when discussing possible futures, it is important NOT only to consider history. History deals mainly with knowledge of the past, and I am of the belief that history does not have a 'pre-determined goal' (some Marxists have that belief), but that development of society in the future is the result of the people who affect it.
This is why I'm reluctant to risk Socialism when we can modify Capitalism. We must make the right choice -- the risk of another Dark Age is too great.
: But one effect socialism would have that would be positive for innovative minds was that it would allow them to focus on the inventive task at hand instead of concentrating on getting bread on the table.
But this is more than true under Capitalism! All of the innovative minds who created recent inventions worked for profit. They didn't have to worry about bread because they knew that the price system would reward their labor.
: And on your final remark, the idea of coming up with a technology to feed ourselves better doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Capitalism. Such a technology could be created for profit - and then it would be available to us members of the privileged Western white upper middle-class, as we are those able to pay. Or it could be created from need, produced publicly by the people and for the people - and many more of those ten billion citizens of the Earth would be fed. If that solution would aid Fidel Castro more than McDonalds - Well, I'd have no problem with that.
My point is that only the incentive of profit can mobilze the best minds against the problems we face. Whatever new technology we develop will be directed towards the hungry people in the world.
Nobody gets rich trying to sell food to people who aren't hungry!
What we need to do now is liberalize third world economies so that the people their can produce something to exchange for the food. Right now, Earth has hundreds of millions of unemployed people...we need to get these people into the capitalist system so that they can start earning...and eating.
- nat
