Although I may seem very anti-socialist, I understand and denounce the many evils of capitalism. Actually, my vision of an ideal society could seem socialist.
There are two reasons why I reject socialism. One is history. No organized society has ever survived on pure socialism without becoming more tyrannical than the tyrannies that preceded them. Socialism effaces the individual. The other is greed.
Greed pervades both capitalist and socialist societies. But capitalism doesn’t try to deny greed, but uses egotistical self-interest to promote, if very weakly, some altruism. Socialism on the other hand, is based on altruism, but ignores the problem of greed, making itself blind in the process, and thus fails.
Consider this excerpt from the journal Socialist Alternative:
Is Socialism Against Human Nature?
“Wherever socialism’s been tried, it always results in a dictatorship because humans are greedy by nature.”
This is a common refrain activists hear when they raise the ideas of socialism. Marxists reject the notion that human nature is fixed or set in stone. In reality, human nature is distinguished by its variability and adaptability. For most of human history, we lived in egalitarian hunter-gatherer societies.
Capitalism pits us all against one another and brings out our competitive, selfish sides. Nonetheless, it is precisely because capitalism does not work in the interest of the vast majority of the world’s population that it compels workers to unite and fight for greater equality and ultimately a new system that will work in the interests of the majority.
A socialist society based on justice and equality – where all our basic needs are provided for, with no ruling class dividing us and pitting us against one another – will be much more conducive to cooperation and solidarity.
A socialist democracy would have nothing in common with the dictatorships in Russia and other “communist” countries (which arose for a variety of historical, economic, and political reasons, not because human nature is “inherently greedy”).
Although these Stalinist countries had elements of a planned economy, working-class people did not democratically control society. Instead, the corruption and repression by the ruling bureaucracy ultimately led to economic collapse and mass rebellion by workers and youth.
To avoid corruption, socialists believe all leaders and officials in workplaces and the government need to be elected, subject to immediate recall by their constituents, and receive the same wage and benefits of the average worker they represent. The workweek needs to be shortened so people have time to democratically participate in the running of society, and the vast gap between rich and poor needs to be eliminated.
The arguments here are very weak. The author alludes to anarchical, pre-agricultural societies to show examples of succesful socialism in mankind’s past. Also, it says capitalism brings out our “competitive, selfish sides”. But it is individuality and competitiveness that fuels innovation and motivates excellence. Even socialists compete with capitalists to prove the capitalist wrong…with often dismal results.
What do I suggest? I suggest we stop looking to the government to solve our problems, and to be revolutionaries in our love for everyone, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, religious, irreligious. That would silence our critics and bring the applause of those who really do care for the poor. This will also attract enemies, of course.
My personal hero is Jesus, who fed the poor, but was not swayed by them. He rejected those who would make him king; he came to serve, not govern. (Presidents, take notice). He was much more effective as a teacher than as an emperor. He made disciples, who made disciples, and in an exponential explosion, overwhelmed the Roman Empire. He gave his life to prove his selfless love, and remains very relevant, two thousand years later.
The more we are like him, the less necessary socialist governments become.
Image by Paco Juarez, used with a Creative Commons license.
0