Capitalism, Socialism, and Freedom

Time to ruminate on capitalism and socialism again. To be honest, I’m probably not the best person to talk about this: I’ve never studied economics. But I’ve been living in a capitalist country for nearly fifty years now and like to think I’m good at thinking things through (and yet, I think I’m the antichrist).

Anyway, on too my discussion. I had a socialist friend in college—a good guy and a good friend. He was always railing against capitalism. One day he mentioned the “labor theory of value” and I finally understood why he was angry. Basically, in a capitalistic corporation headed by a CEO, etc… the low level workers are the ones primarily responsible for producing the product, and yet they are the ones who reap the least benefit. I think that’s basically true. And, I agree it is an injustice. I just don’t trust the government to fix it.

But let’s return to the problem. There is more to monetary value, though, than labor. Smart decisions, for example: responding to markets, making wise investments, and a plethora of other things I don’t understand. To be fair, though, I think there is an injustice when a factory worker for a corporation pulls down 30k a year, while the CEO pulls down 30 million—and it is those at the top who decide how much each individual earns. The corporation would cease to exist if all the workers vanished (unless replaced with automation—which is coming). Likewise, I’m sure a poorly-skilled CEO will quickly lead the corporation to destruction.

I remember one of my philosophy professors many years ago saying that he didn’t like working in committees because nothing gets done. They go back and forth, back and forth, and take forever to agree on a course of action. Committees (or other groups of people) are democratic in nature; individuals are more capable of efficiently making decisions. We should keep this in mind in terms of the capitalism/socialism debate.

A moment’s reflection will show that this is a critical distinction between the two systems—in theory. A capitalist system incorporating a well-defined hierarchy will be more efficient at making decisions and seeing them through. A socialist system purports to be more democratic (in real-life socialist countries, I don’t think this actually bears out: socialist leaders invariably benefit more from a country’s wealth than capitalist one’s—until the capitalist ones leave office. I’m inclined to think our leaders, whether democratic or socialist, will, in general, over benefit some). So the conflict between capitalism and socialism can be seen as a struggle between decision and democracy. So, a capitalistic company with a hierarchical structure likely is probably more efficient in terms of decisions. Those at the top will likely have a disproportionate amount of power and resultant money from business. A socialist company could have a level structure, but if they are set up to be democratic decision-making efficiency will be lost. All of that is “in theory.” Like I said, socialist leaders usually have an inordinate amount of wealth while their people very little.

What is missing, though, in this discussion, is the notion of FREEDOM. Which system nurtures the greater degree of freedom? To date, I think that victory belongs to the capitalist, but this is stretching my knowledge base now. Sure, in a capitalist society you may be able to chart your own course, but how “free” are you if you lack the money to buy even a cup of coffee? Socialism promises (but rarely delivers) a greater share of the wealth to all. And, so they say (or should say), wealth is used to cultivate your freedom. However, if we are interested in freedom, must we choose between capitalism and socialism? Is it not possible to have a company based on capitalist principles with a hierarchical structure, etc… and a company based on more socialist principles operating side by side in the same economy? I think it should be. Both should be allowed in a FREE society. And if the socialist company can’t compete with the capitalist one, that’s not the capitalist one’s problem. Or vice versa. So, I’m inclined to think that the more important feature of an economy is not socialism or capitalism, but FREEDOM.

Capitalism is usually equated with freedom, but perhaps it is possible for a socialist system to incorporate more freedom and make itself more attractive. If I retain control of determining what products I purchase, what jobs I pursue, where I live, etc… in a socialist system, it might be worth looking at.

Lastly, I like Doritos and I don’t expect the capitalists will ever try to take them away from me. I am not so sure of the socialists.

Moral Relativism and the Judgment of God

As some of you might know, I hate moral relativism. Why? Like a character in one of my novels once said, it is like arguing with a marshmallow. It never takes a position, morphing from one form into another, so one is left spinning around and dancing to an incoherent tune. Personally, my disdain is tied to the issue of abortion and how moral relativism influences that discussion; if I am going to lose the abortion argument, it’s not going to be to the position that there is no moral truth.

Anyway, back to moral relativism. To me, it seems that the moral relativist is so enamored with the notion of non-judgment he seems to think that not even God has the right to judge him. Now, I don’t believe in a fire and brimstone Deity Who will blast into non-existence any being who questions Him; I just expect that God, being God, will win any argument with anyone. Although I don’t expect God to be a harsh judge, I do expect Him to tell me where I’ve screwed up in this life (which is quite often). I wouldn’t respect a Deity that didn’t have the decency of telling me the truth about myself.

The relativist, however, doesn’t seem to agree. How can he? If everything he believes is true for him, how can anyone dispute him? Not even God can argue with a relativist, because what God believes is only true for Him. And the relativist himself is ensconced in a protective sphere mysteriously referred to as “his truth.”

And so we come to death and the judgment of souls. What is the answer? Do we encounter a Deity at the end of our lives Who will actually make the effort to evaluate how we behaved, or will the Deity simply agree with everything we think? Of course, as the truth (pun intended) of the matter is hidden by the veil of death, we may never know for sure. Maybe we can expect only oblivion. Regardless, I know which scenario I don’t believe and I refuse to follow the relativistic lemmings over the latest politically correct cliff.