'Capitalism versus Democrat socialism ' by Vince

The just concluded elections posed a simple question to the masses, not just in America, but across the voting globe. Is socialism/communism the preferred path forward for western nations, or does capitalism still provide true equal opportunity for all? For most people, this seems like a no-brainer. All we need to do is look across the pond at Western Europe, and its failing message becomes crystal clear. There comes a point when the socialist dogma collides with basic arithmetic and personal freedom; and the results are almost always catastrophic.

 

Capitalism for all its hypothetical flaws, still provides record generating wealth, continuous innovation, equal opportunity, rising living standards, and unrivaled personal freedom. Collectivist systems, wherever they have attempted to replace the free market with comprehensive state control, have repeatedly produced shortages, financial stagnation, corruption, and eventually repression. That’s not my partisan viewpoint; it’s a historical fact.

 

The premise is simple really; socialism/communism assumes that political authorities can allocate resources more intelligently than millions of people making independent financial decisions on their own behalf. Of course, we know this to be ludicrous. No central committee knows how many shoes, semiconductors, antibiotics, truck parts, restaurant meals, or bicycles a society needs next month. No government official can replicate the information conveyed by fair market pricing, competition, and consumer choice.

 

The Soviet Union tried this on an enormous scale. Same goes for Mao’s China, its leaders promised equality and abundance; yet delivered long lines, shortages, censorship, secret police, forced collectivization, and catastrophic starvation. Venezuela possessed extraordinary oil wealth and still managed to create massive energy shortages, hyperinflation, death squads, mass emigration, and industrial collapse after dismantling property rights and allowing political parties to devastate the economic landscape. This ideology is apparently never responsible for all its failures. 

 

Which brings us back to Western Europe. We are currently bearing witness to a head-on collision of repressive governance and forced multiculturalism, resulting in a new brand of catastrophe on many levels. And while Europe may not be the Soviet Union, its current troubles still expose the same underlying danger; promises made without sustainable financing eventually become political dynamite. The addition of unvetted third world migrants only exacerbates the impending tragedy.

 

And when benefits expand faster than productivity, when retirement age remains politically untouchable, when regulations make hiring more people expensive, and when taxpayers are told that every new demand is a moral obligation, the system begins to cannibalize itself. This is a predictable cycle; taxes rise, investment diminishes, productive workers leave or reduce their effort, businesses relocate, and public debt and discontent grow. This is the basic economic framework of every socialist/communist country.

 

This is where thoughtless immigration policies enter the fray for western culture. Properly managed, they can bring a much-needed labor demographic to a country or region in need of cheap labor. But this is by no means a blank check; the fiscal and institutional effects depend on who arrives, how quickly newcomers can work legally, and how effectively they assimilate or integrate into the host country’s culture. Without those components being strictly enforced, any society is doomed to fail.

 

The real issue inevitably becomes does a society reward work ethic, investment, family formation, entrepreneurship, and civic responsibility; or does it create a maze in which productive people are punished while political factions pander to illegal migrants and virtue signal their way into insolvency? This is Western Europe’s present-day dilemma.

 

Capitalisms’ moral case is much stronger than the Marxists will honestly admit. It encourages people to own property, start businesses, change employers, negotiate wages, and pursue all of life’s endeavors without asking permission from the government. It disperses power, while socialism concentrates it. In fact, socialism’s concentration of power often makes corruption more dangerous because there are fewer independent institutions capable of holding it accountable. 

 

Capitalism does not guarantee success. It does something much more important; it creates the conditions in which success is attainable and failure is survivable. Socialism promises paradise through state control and repeatedly delivers disappointment through corruption and oppression. After centuries of evidence, continuing to pretend otherwise is not idealism; it’s simply ignorance.

Editorial comments expressed in this column are the sole opinion of the writer