Capitalism, the Real Love Story

If you were to turn on the news today, at some point the term "socialism' would sure to be mentioned. To some, the connotation of this a freighting idealism, while to others it is the answer to all societies ills. Those who gravitate to socialistic ideals often hold "capitalism" as its antithesis, and tend to preach the evils of it. The thing that has struck me odd about the modern socialist is that they have a real dependency on the free market to bring their ideas to fulfillment.

In the past, politicians and political organization had often used socialism to gain favor in a disillusioned society. To often they have used these speeches of social fairness to establish totalitarian control over the people whom entrusted them. As a result, the people who fell under control of these tyrants received the opposite of what they sought. This is a lesson that history has learned time and time again, and it continues on to this day. Those whom embrace socialism and oppose tyranny have also learned these lessons and have developed a new type of socialism, this modern "progressive" socialism.

These modern socialists have learned that if you eliminate free market capitalism, you remove the incentive for people to innovate and advance. Over time this stagnation causes an erosion of the social values and individuals begin to abandon their social conscience for their self interests. This is why the concept of a "mixed" economy was developed. Now people are allowed personal achievement (to a point) while maintaining a desired amount of wealth redistribution. For this to idealism to continue to work, society must have a greater number of people providing to the greater good then those in which receive from it.

Unfortunately, even with the principles of a mixed economy, society continues to deteriorate, just at a slower rate. At some point those whom wish to receive the gifts of society start to outnumber those whom provide. When this begins to occur, it is those whom benefit politically from socialism that begin to support the free market. Through history, they have learned that the principles that they support, by themselves, will end in disaster. This strange relationship with capitalism steams from necessity, not admiration.

Other then economic support, capitalism also serves the socialist well as a scapegoat. This has become a useful means of gaining support by the statist politician. When the economy is in an upswing and the public is content, the claim is made by these politicians this is due to the socialistic programs they had administered. When economies recess, they argue that it is because of the failings of capitalism. While it is true that capitalism left alone would have normal peaks and valleys, these economic corrections are made worse by artificial stimulation of socialist activity. The best way for politicians to maintain their influence is to assign the event on an the invisible fall guy called capitalism. It has been a technique they have used since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

The one truth that about this relationship that you will never hear from those who support socialism is that they can not survive without capitalism. Yes, they will explain the benefits of their idealism until the sun sinks into the abyss, but never will they honestly discuss the survivability of socialism if capitalism was no more. Socialism simply can not work without those to provide to its system, and therefore a purely socialistic society would cease to exist. On the other hand, capitalism would survive and thrive very well without the influence of socialism. With that said, would it be nice for the socialists to come clean and say," thank you, capitalism, we love you"?