I don't see labels as necessarily bad. Label is just another word for
name and to speak of just about anything you have to name it or what you
say makes no sense. The problem with this author is that he uses three
labels that he is defining apparently by some private definition and
then just assumes that everyone reading his piece will share his private
definition. He makes some slight attempt to define socialism as having
something to do with ownership by "the" government, but that is not
exactly what socialism is and there are a lot of quibbles that can be
made about what he means by "the" government. What government? What kind
of government? And so forth. But then he offers economic democracy as a
third way apart from socialism and capitalism. If he had ever bothered
to look into what socialism is all about - and his half hearted attempt
to define it shows that he very probably has not - he would know that
the whole idea of socialism is economic democracy. That is, economic
democracy is socialism and socialism is economic democracy. He has
completely failed at coming up with a third way.
On 4/14/2016 10:55 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
The Closed Mind. Number One enemy of Independence and Human Dignity.
I hate handles. Sure, some of them are necessary, like Man or Woman
or Old or Young, but when labels are used in an attempt to put groups
of people into neat little boxes, labels become prison cells. Instead
of discovering what a group of people believe, we label them and then
trash or uphold the label. While I say that I am a "free thinker", I
must admit that this is almost impossible to achieve in this closed
minded world. We seem to have been trained to fear the exchange of
ideas, exploring them together in order to come to a better
understanding.
Carl Jarvis
On 4/12/16, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This article does the same thing that most every attempt to discredit
socialism does. It misrepresents socialism and then tries to discredit
the misrepresentation. That is known as a straw man argument. And as
long as the author is contending that both capitalism and socialism are
ill defined one would think that he would at least well define his
alternative of economic democracy, but instead we get a vague
pronouncement that it is a better third way. I suppose it would surprise
the author to find out that socialism is economic democracy. It would
surprise him because he has not bothered to find out what socialism is.
He prefers to criticize a distortion of it.
On 4/12/2016 6:32 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Capitalism or Socialism? There's an Even Better Option
Published on
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
by
YES! Magazine
Capitalism or Socialism? There's an Even Better Option
Bernie Sanders' popular campaign suggests that many Americans aren't
afraid
of socialism anymore. But real democracy is an even better alternative to
capitalism.
by
David Korten
(Illustration by Valeriy Kachaev / iStock.)
Politics and polling data reveal a remarkable shift in American attitudes
toward socialism. More Democrats now view socialism favorably (42
percent)
than unfavorably (34 percent). Among young adults, socialism does even
better with a 43 percent favorable view vs. only 26 percent unfavorable.
Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, a self-described Democratic
Socialist, has surprised the establishment with the strength of his
campaign. He is especially popular among Millennials, the generation
positioned to define America's future.
So is the United States turning to socialism?
Proponents of capitalism assure us we have only two choices: capitalism
(big
business) or socialism (big government). As we see the self-proclaimed
capitalist regime's incapacity to address growing economic desperation
and
accelerating social breakdown and environmental collapse, socialism, for
all
its own evident faults, becomes the only option.
I grew up in a prosperous small town in Washington state. Our main street
was populated by thriving, mostly local, businesses. My dad owned and
managed a successful retail music and appliance store located in the
heart
of the business district in the heart of a vibrant community. He loved
making money but often said, "If you are not in business to serve your
customers and community, you have no business being in business."
I assumed that my life growing up was the result of the happy confluence
of
capitalism, democracy, and a market economy. Given that socialism was
represented as the antithesis of these things, I accepted the view that
socialism is anti-American and a threat to freedom and democracy.
Of course, my early hometown experience bears little relationship to the
capitalism we know today. Over time, I realized that it's not so simple.
Debating the relative merits of two failed and ill-defined ideologies is
a
diversion from the real issues. In the United States, we face the
inherent
disabilities of both big government and big business. And the unholy
alliance between the two that renders democracy-the voice of the
people-mute.
Assuming that capitalism is about the economy and democracy is about
governance, we fail to recognize an essential truth: There is no
political
democracy without economic democracy.
In any economic system, power resides with the owners of the means by
which
people make their living. The power of kings resided in their ownership
of
the lands and waters from which their subjects harvested their food and
quenched their thirst. Under socialism, government owns these assets in
the
name, but not necessarily the interest, of the people.
"There is no political democracy without economic democracy."
Under contemporary capitalism, the rights and powers of ownership reside
with global corporations that control jobs, resources, and markets. They
own
land, water, intellectual property, mining concessions, manufacturing,
banks, schools, prisons, health care facilities, media-and politicians.
They
lavishly reward their board members and top executives for maximizing
short-term profit without regard to social and environmental
consequences-and replace them if they don't.
Capitalism cultivates an illusion of freedom while consigning all but the
few at the top to lives of wage and debt slavery. It is a far cry from
either democracy or Adam Smith's vision of local markets governed by a
shared moral code and populated by local farmers, artisans, and merchants
who own their own land and tools, care about their neighbors, and come to
the market to exchange goods and services. Thomas Jefferson recognized
Smith's economic vision as an essential foundation of democracy.
Democracy is a governance system in which power resides in the people.
That
power cannot be limited to voting for political representatives every few
years. It must be rooted in economic structures that distribute power
equitably and link it to the interests of communities of place. Such
structures can come in many forms: Individual and family enterprises,
community-owned enterprises, cooperatives-large and small-and even
governmental and quasi-governmental bodies.
Democracy is the life-serving alternative we seek to the life-destroying
capitalist tyranny under which we now live. Democracy, not the false
dichotomy of capitalism or socialism, should be the election's framing
issue.
This article was written for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media
organization that fuses powerful ideas and practical actions. Licensed
under
a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
David Korten
Skip to main content
//
. DONATE
. SIGN UP FOR NEWSLETTER
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
. Home
. World
. U.S.
. Canada
. Climate
. War & Peace
. Economy
. Rights
. Solutions
. Political Revolution
. Panama Papers
. Election 2016
Capitalism or Socialism? There's an Even Better Option
Published on
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
by
YES! Magazine
Capitalism or Socialism? There's an Even Better Option
Bernie Sanders' popular campaign suggests that many Americans aren't
afraid
of socialism anymore. But real democracy is an even better alternative to
capitalism.
by
David Korten
. 22 Comments
.
. (Illustration by Valeriy Kachaev / iStock.)
. Politics and polling data reveal a remarkable shift in American
attitudes toward socialism. More Democrats now view socialism favorably
(42
percent) than unfavorably (34 percent). Among young adults, socialism
does
even better with a 43 percent favorable view vs. only 26 percent
unfavorable. Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, a self-described
Democratic Socialist, has surprised the establishment with the strength
of
his campaign. He is especially popular among Millennials, the generation
positioned to define America's future.
. So is the United States turning to socialism?
. Proponents of capitalism assure us we have only two choices:
capitalism (big business) or socialism (big government). As we see the
self-proclaimed capitalist regime's incapacity to address growing
economic
desperation and accelerating social breakdown and environmental collapse,
socialism, for all its own evident faults, becomes the only option.
. I grew up in a prosperous small town in Washington state. Our main
street was populated by thriving, mostly local, businesses. My dad owned
and
managed a successful retail music and appliance store located in the
heart
of the business district in the heart of a vibrant community. He loved
making money but often said, "If you are not in business to serve your
customers and community, you have no business being in business."
I assumed that my life growing up was the result of the happy confluence
of
capitalism, democracy, and a market economy. Given that socialism was
represented as the antithesis of these things, I accepted the view that
socialism is anti-American and a threat to freedom and democracy.
Of course, my early hometown experience bears little relationship to the
capitalism we know today. Over time, I realized that it's not so simple.
Debating the relative merits of two failed and ill-defined ideologies is
a
diversion from the real issues. In the United States, we face the
inherent
disabilities of both big government and big business. And the unholy
alliance between the two that renders democracy-the voice of the
people-mute.
Assuming that capitalism is about the economy and democracy is about
governance, we fail to recognize an essential truth: There is no
political
democracy without economic democracy.
In any economic system, power resides with the owners of the means by
which
people make their living. The power of kings resided in their ownership
of
the lands and waters from which their subjects harvested their food and
quenched their thirst. Under socialism, government owns these assets in
the
name, but not necessarily the interest, of the people.
"There is no political democracy without economic democracy."
Under contemporary capitalism, the rights and powers of ownership reside
with global corporations that control jobs, resources, and markets. They
own
land, water, intellectual property, mining concessions, manufacturing,
banks, schools, prisons, health care facilities, media-and politicians.
They
lavishly reward their board members and top executives for maximizing
short-term profit without regard to social and environmental
consequences-and replace them if they don't.
Capitalism cultivates an illusion of freedom while consigning all but the
few at the top to lives of wage and debt slavery. It is a far cry from
either democracy or Adam Smith's vision of local markets governed by a
shared moral code and populated by local farmers, artisans, and merchants
who own their own land and tools, care about their neighbors, and come to
the market to exchange goods and services. Thomas Jefferson recognized
Smith's economic vision as an essential foundation of democracy.
Democracy is a governance system in which power resides in the people.
That
power cannot be limited to voting for political representatives every few
years. It must be rooted in economic structures that distribute power
equitably and link it to the interests of communities of place. Such
structures can come in many forms: Individual and family enterprises,
community-owned enterprises, cooperatives-large and small-and even
governmental and quasi-governmental bodies.
Democracy is the life-serving alternative we seek to the life-destroying
capitalist tyranny under which we now live. Democracy, not the false
dichotomy of capitalism or socialism, should be the election's framing
issue.
This article was written for YES! Magazine, a national, nonprofit media
organization that fuses powerful ideas and practical actions. Licensed
under
a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
