Spring Break
Socialism is not the answer for today's troubles
Dwight Wozich
Issue date: 4/6/09 Section: Forum
While the economic situation facing our country is certainly disheartening, there is a social phenomena developing that has the potential to be much more damaging to our nation in the long run.
The greed and narcissism of the American financial sector that influenced the economic collapse is certainly inexcusable, but it is more upsetting to note how many of my peers, countrymen and citizens around the world are beginning to view our current situation as the failure of capitalism.
Over the last several weeks, I have listened to several of my schoolmates argue that if the world lived by socialist values, somehow the corruption and deceit inherit in humanity would vanish and the world would never experience financial upheaval again.
My answer to these flawed views is not only would the current economic crisis be much worse if we lived in a socialist system, but we also would live in a society that inherently promotes inequality among its citizens, stamps on freedom of speech and religion and would ultimately be far more corrupt and damaging than anything our country has ever experienced.
One of the main tenants of Marxism is "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Put simply, the government takes money from you based on a subjective analysis of your skills and redistributes it amongst your countrymen; your personal income and social status are based on the relative value of your occupation to society.
It doesn't matter whether you are a doctor who went through 10 years of schooling to get your degree, or a master machinist who has slaved away in factories since finishing high school. You will never be rewarded more for your work than the thousands of other men and women that share your occupation.
A surgeon at the top of their field is paid the same as the quack that is repeatedly sued for malpractice. A teacher whose students regularly test above grade level on their subjects is paid the same as the incompetent teacher whose students are stunted by their poor-quality learning environment.
The greed and narcissism of the American financial sector that influenced the economic collapse is certainly inexcusable, but it is more upsetting to note how many of my peers, countrymen and citizens around the world are beginning to view our current situation as the failure of capitalism.
Over the last several weeks, I have listened to several of my schoolmates argue that if the world lived by socialist values, somehow the corruption and deceit inherit in humanity would vanish and the world would never experience financial upheaval again.
My answer to these flawed views is not only would the current economic crisis be much worse if we lived in a socialist system, but we also would live in a society that inherently promotes inequality among its citizens, stamps on freedom of speech and religion and would ultimately be far more corrupt and damaging than anything our country has ever experienced.
One of the main tenants of Marxism is "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Put simply, the government takes money from you based on a subjective analysis of your skills and redistributes it amongst your countrymen; your personal income and social status are based on the relative value of your occupation to society.
It doesn't matter whether you are a doctor who went through 10 years of schooling to get your degree, or a master machinist who has slaved away in factories since finishing high school. You will never be rewarded more for your work than the thousands of other men and women that share your occupation.
A surgeon at the top of their field is paid the same as the quack that is repeatedly sued for malpractice. A teacher whose students regularly test above grade level on their subjects is paid the same as the incompetent teacher whose students are stunted by their poor-quality learning environment.
Note: writers will not reply to comments.
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 14
Eric Betts
posted 4/06/09 @ 10:25 AM PST
I'm curious if the author is familiar with the respective definitions of socialism and communism. I don't believe they are synonyms.
Daniel Dean
posted 4/07/09 @ 1:52 AM PST
How can you use socialism in the headline, quote a quote from Marx that's completely misinterpreted, and then say communism. The inconsistencies in this argument makes it a rather weak one. (Continued…)
C. Jeffery Evans
posted 4/10/09 @ 2:39 PM PST
Sounds like you passed your classes on political and economic theory --- taught by necons. Reality is most of those I know in Ukraine and Russia feel that they were better off under communism. (Continued…)
Eric Hill
posted 4/10/09 @ 3:27 PM PST
Aaron,
It wasn't common sense to the early Christian church (see Acts 2:44-45). There seems to be something inherently greedy about us today that prevents us from being able to even conceive of a system that might offer help to those who less fortunate than ourselves. (Continued…)
Eric Hill
posted 4/12/09 @ 8:09 PM PST
Aaron, thank you for responding in such a thoughtful and respectful manner. I honestly appreciate you taking the time to consider my points (rather than what usually happens!) I do, however, think you may have put some words in my mouth (pen? processor?) I don't think it would be possible to be "completely" protected from our own selfish and greedy ways; that would be naive and dangerous. (Continued…)
Post a Comment
Comments by registered users are approved by default.