There were two competing ideologies since the
19th century - capitalism and socialism. Capitalism is all about money and it
is the most effective mechanism to increase ... capital. No people is mentioned
in capitalism as an ideology. People serve to capital. Socialism is all about
people as equal social actors and is aimed at social progress like resource equality
to maximize personal growth. No money is
mentioned in socialism as ideology. Money serve to people.
The USSR failed as a system because it was
economically less effective than the countries professing capitalism. Almost all
resources in the USSR were divided between people to enhance human progress except
those aimed at defense and protection.
The USA is an example of capitalism success -
capital reins. The US people does not matter, however. The median real personal
income has not been growing since the late 1980s. Capital seeks only the rate
of own growth. Proportional share of resources for personal growth (education, health,
sports, arts, etc.) is not available for increasing share of population. People
are slaves of capital and this makes them angry. It makes angry the Rust Belt,
the victims of slavery, and highly likely in the near future the Latinos
invited to occupy the worst job positions. This is because people is not a part
of capitalism.
Western Europe is not a good example as well.
It's wealth basement was also built during the centuries of colonial robbery. Now these
countries have to invite people from the former colonies to serve as ... servants.
Nobody is happy for long time in such positions.
Finally, China has been chasing the pink unicorn merging both ideologies in one big pot: socio-capitalism. The Communist Party rules the society (distributes resources for personal growth) and also allows the capitalism to do its inhuman job. Currently, the human progress in China is as tremendous as economic. This makes the Chinese socio-capitalism a temporary alternative to both pure ideologies and this situation infuriates the capitalism ideology. The USA and China compete on the brink of war. In the USA, the interest of capital prevents the hot war phase so far.
I am not sure about the stability of this socialism-capitalism symbiosis. Is it mutualistic, commensalistic, or parasitic. (I guess that inhuman always wins.) But I am sure that
the competition between the global capital and this new socio-economic
formation in China (likely some other countries with average economic
development may follow this path as well) has many reasons for various wars,
including the civil ones. I do believe the mankind can win in this war against
the global capital ... when kills itself. Instructively, no human beings - no
capital.
No comments:
Post a Comment