Communism vs. Capitalism in the New Millennium
By Tony Cantu
As we enter the new
millennium the forces promulgating and shaping the manner in which we live as a
civilized society continue.
In 1848, written in Brussels, Karl Marx
and Engels Manifesto of the Communist Party,
later described at length in the three volumes of Das
Kapital published in 1867, claimed that since
for a long continuance the working people (the proletariat) had been oppressed
and exploited by the middle-class (the bourgeoisie), ultimately in the final
struggle the overthrow of capitalism was inevitable.
Communist utopia (from the Greek term
"ou topos" which
means "no place") has appeared in writing since the time of
Plato. The modern doctrine and
practice of communism has, as its aims, economic, political, and social justice
for all people.
Marx and Engels
claimed that a classless society would then emerge without the need of more
revolutions. Everyone would be
guided by the dictum "From each according to his ability; to each
according to his needs." The
state, or organized government, would no longer be needed and would
"wither away."
In utopia, the "Manifesto of the
Communist Party" is, in fact, very seducing. Statements such as
"social justice" or "From each according to his ability; to each
according to his needs", sound, in fact, very appealing. However, one of the practical problems
Karl and Engels inconspicuously overlooked in their
Manifesto was the most significant, the mere nature of the human being.
The statement "From each according
to his ability; to each according to his needs" obviously implies that in
a communist system there has to be "per se," a clique of persons
performing two critical tasks: evaluating each individual's abilities and
determining each individual's needs.
First of all, a major consequence of
this implication is that the individual nature of the human being is literally
taken away. The individual no
longer controls his abilities nor his needs, but as
property of the state, submits his individuality for that of the determination
of the state.
Secondly, a ruling dictatorial clique, which determines the fate of each individual within the
communist system, ultimately emerges with total ruling powers.
It is, therefore, that in practice,
like a cone standing on its tip, Communism is an unstable system, which,
invariably and inevitably, swirls into a totalitarian government, let it be
Stalinist, fascistic or neo-nazi.
In contrast, the word economics comes
from a Greek word meaning "household management," which is the
performance of the tasks and services that allow a family to survive and
prosper. Thus economic functions
are activities devoted to satisfying the primary needs of food, clothing, and
shelter; needs that are common to all human beings. Economic functions also satisfy desires
for goods and services that are not genuine needs, but that people in a
prosperous society want.
One of the ways goods and services are
provided is through an economic system called "capitalism." Other names for this system are free
market economy and free enterprise.
All three terms were made in the late 19th and the early 20th century to
describe economic arrangements that began developing in Europe several
centuries ago.
The word capital refers to what are
called factors of production. These
include the money, land, buildings, and machinery that it takes to operate an
enterprise such as a factory or farm.
The "capitalist" is the individual (or group of individuals)
who supply the money to get the enterprise going.
The other two terms, free market
economy and free enterprise, put a slightly different
slant on capitalism. They have in
common the word free. The
implication is that people have the individual liberty and the right to own
property and to do what they wish with their property (as long as it does not
harm anyone else). These freedoms
set capitalism apart from all other kinds of economic arrangements. While other systems take a top-down
command and control in which personal freedom and the rights of property are
sacrificed for the good of the state, the capitalist system is based in giving
each individual the freedom to better (or worse) him/herself.
In the context of capitalism, the term
private property has a specific definition. It signifies the means of
production. A farm as property is
the means by which food is produced; and a factory as property is the means by
which durable goods are produced.
The heart of capitalism is the producer's right to make what he wants
and the consumer's right to choose what to buy.
Capitalism is society organized as a
market, in contrast to society organized as government and subjects. Money, land,
machinery, labor, channels of distribution, and buying and selling all work
together to form such a market.
Some institutions, notably government and religion, should stand apart
from the market; but they also depend upon the wealth it creates for their
well-being. Taxes, for instance,
are portions of wealth taken from society to pay for government functions.
The division of labor, price, profit,
and rules have worked together to establish a society, now on a global scale,
connected by an intricate network of market relationships. This market system was unplanned. It evolved slowly, as did the rules by
which it operates. The market is a
product of spontaneous human action but not human design. People, impelled by nature to maximize
their well-being, created what proved to be workable arrangements that
augmented individual and social prosperity. The market system does not depend on
people sharing the same values, belonging to the same ethnic group, or having
the same religion. It does not even
depend on their liking each other.
It is rooted only in the common desire to improve the material
conditions of one's life.
Supporters of capitalism declare that
economic freedom is the most basic of human liberties. Yet the market system has been strongly
criticized by opponents who claim that it has not provided an equally high
standard of living for all. The
claim is true: there are inequalities of wealth under capitalism, although they
are much less than under other systems.
Success in a free market depends in large part on individual effort and
ability and effort and ability are unevenly distributed among human beings.
The goal of equality of wealth can only
be pursued by force, and governments must do the forcing. The economy itself has no mechanisms of
coercion available to it. Yet the
20th-century systems that have relied on force, such as Communism, have badly failed
to achieve a high standard of living for any but a ruling minority. But these are not economic systems; they
are political systems.
The market economy, by contrast, does
not guarantee equal outcomes for all.
It tries to maintain liberty and equality under law for all
participants.
As the new millennium crosses the
bounds of time, we must decide how we want to live, either by the rule of
government dictating our every move, or by the rule of our own individual
freedom.
Tony Cantu has been an activist in the
conservative movement and human rights since the early age of fifteen. This article is composed of the author's
writings and several articles and encyclopedias.
╪