Since the name of this debating page is called "Capitalism and it's Alternatives" it seems only fitting to list the main types of ideological systems that have been floating around.CAPITALISM: In its purest form, Capitalism consists of no Government and no legal representation - just big companies doing what they like for profit. Although the system adopted by most countries includes a small degree of Government control (in the guise of "democracy" or "representative democracy"), such countries are becoming more Capitalist every day.
There seems to be no founder of Capitalism; the system has evolved out of the Industrial Revolution. However, the chief expounder would have to be Right-wing radical, Ayn Rand. Her branch of "objectivism" states that the well-being of society only comes through "the dynamic power and the creative vision of hard work and competitive self-interest" and that while some "lazy dogs" may suffer, mankind as a whole will evolve and develop in the best possible way. The only threat to pure Capitalism, according to Rand, is the menace of "Socialist slackers who rely on the state, rather than relying on their own dynamic powers" and
"Governments who restrict and stifle the well-being of society by imposing unnatural environmental and corporate laws on hard-working businessmen". Her novel ATLAS SHRUGGED is about a Capitalist Utopia where Companies are free to evolve through no restrictions - and where the Government wilts into obscurity. Needless to say, not many people outside the U.S. agree with Ayn Rand.
The extreme of Capitalism is Fascism, the best example of which was Adolf Hitler's Germany. While having total power, he heavily relied on private industry and gave companies huge concessions and great power over the workers. A company could even shoot a worker if he wasn't performing up to certain standards. Having said that, pure Capitalism is Middle Right, and so is not Fascism in a conventional sense.
SOCIALISM: Created by Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels, this branch of Marxism provides a completely opposite view to Capitalism. Marx claims that because wealth corrupts people and strangles the workers, there should be little private property and no private industry; everything would be owned and controlled by the State, which would usually be elected. The State (or Government) provides jobs for all, and gives people all the material posessions they need. Although efficiency is sacrificed to a degree due to no competition (it is pointless for the Government to compete against itself), the advantage is higher levels of social equality.
In a true Socialist State, your physical well-being would be looked after. If you had no food, the State would always provide you with some; but if you were rich, most of your capital would be taken away from you. Unfortunately, this has never occured; rather, dictatorial forms such as COMMUNISM have developed. Although Gorbachev started to reform Russia to true Socialism through policies of PERESTROIKA, Yeltsin took over and converted Russia to Capitalism.
ANARCHISM: "Every man should be his own home, his own lawmaker and his own church" is a quote which adequately describes Anarchism. In a true Anarchist country, there would be no Government and no private enterprise; rather, there would be small communities operating together in mutual cooperation. Because there is no form of outside control from business or from Government (because they don't exist), cooperation is essential for well-being.
The person to first seriously suggest Anarchism would be the 19th century economist, Preudhom. He said bluntly that "Property is theft" and that "Governments are the scourge of God".His solution was a society with few laws and with no business or Government; but with mutual co-operation. This would reduce greed and lead to happiness through true community involvement.
It is necessary to point out that Anarchism would have some laws and that the community as a group would be able to enforce them; a totally unrestricted society with no laws is called Anarcho-Capitalism. Furthermore, Anarchism is often confused with violence, the punk movement and disorder - true Anarchism is neither of these things.
The obvious problem raised by many people is that Anarchism assumes that people are basically good, and that they will help eachother not out of obligation, but out of community spirit with no restrictions placed on them. Because the idea of Anarchism means absence of authority or control, supporters have to be trusting as to the goodness of mankind.
SYNDICALISM: An interesting form of Government suggested by Socialist splinter groups in the 1800's. Under Syndicalism, there would be no Government; but, there would be an important law stating that every employee of a business has to own an equal percentage of that business. As an example, if there were 100 employees in one business, they would each own exactly 1% and would share in the profits equally. There would be no boss; decisions would be made through meetings and voting. Because each person owns an equal percentage of the business, nobody would have a higher rank over anyone and nobody would make more money than anyone else. Competition would still exist between businesses, but equality would exist in the businesses themselves.
Despite the fact that this seems to be very fair, there are a few problems. Firstly, the workers of a large company could collectively vote to eradicate a smaller competitor through pressure tactics. Secondly, if you had a job it would be very safe because you would need 51% of the work force to agree to your redundancy BUT if you were unemployed, you would probably starve. Thirdly, because no one person has any more control or profit over the business than anyone else, it would be hard to come to concrete decisions every week.
An alternative to pure Syndicalism is Anarcho-Syndicalism, nost notably expounded by Professor Noam Chomsky. Under this system, values of community and society would exist; but local businesses would operate in a Syndicalist fashion.
Well, I hope this informal text has given some of you a better working knowledge of these systems. Unfortunately, it is pretty rough, so if you're particularly interested in any specific part of it, please contact me. I hope I haven't forced any of my political views onto you through any of my descriptions..yet! I would also welcome any replies.
One thing's for fure: McDonalds is one of the greatest products of Capitalism.
