Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Capitalism v. socialism
Section A. Philosophy/political theory

When the last edition of Pros and Cons was published (in 1999), it perhaps appeared as though the fall of the Berlin Wall had settled this topic for most right-thinking people. But since then, numerous developments have revived an interest in investigating the fundamental acceptability of capitalism as an economic system such as the development of ’Gross National Happiness’ indexes to measure welfare as more than financial; a growing concern for capitalism’s impact on the environment; and of course, the global financial crisis. An important point to remember is that in between the two polar opposites presented here, there is a spectrum of different systems which involve partial regulation by the state of the market and the use of market forces to deliver essential governmental functions.

Pros

[1] The fundamental driving force of human life, and of the natural world as a whole, is competition. Human nature is selfish and competitive, and by allowing this instinct to rule, we have survived as a species. Capitalism recognises this by letting the most successful individuals flourish through hard work and success in an open competitive market. Capitalism is an economic and social version of the ’survival of the fittest’.

[2] Capitalism recognises that it is not society at large but individuals who are the ultimate source of wealth creation and economic growth. It is people’s effort which transforms the goods in the natural world into tradable projects or which offers valuable services. People’s hard work should be rewarded with the fruits of their labour, instead of penalised with punitive taxes.

[3] The endeavours of the entrepreneur, the landowner or the capitalist in fact benefit not only those individuals but all those millions who work under them, or those who gain work due to their efforts, the so- called subsidiary economies. Individuals who bring in investment from abroad and create successful enterprises are already benefiting the community at large by creating wealth, employment, better working conditions and an improved quality of life — they should not be required to do so a second time through redistribution of their private wealth.

[4] The socialist system encourages a sense of entitlement and welfare dependency. A capitalist system encourages enterprise and progress. People see that hard work and ingenuity are rewarded and thus they are motivated. In a socialist system where the state provides for all, there is no motivation to work hard, and the elimination of the market halts the processes of competition and selection.

[5] In purely economic terms, free competition is the only way to protect against monopolies. State-owned and state-run monopolies, in the absence of competition, become inefficient, wasteful and bureaucratic, and supply bad overpriced services to the consumer.

Cons

[1] The natural and human worlds are characterised by co-operation as much as by competition. In nature, species flourish through the practice of ’reciprocal altruism’ — mutual helping behaviour. Groups rather than individuals are the unit of selection. Socialism recognises these facts and proposes an equal co-operative society rather than an unnaturally harsh, individualist and competitive one.

[2] The capitalist belief in the autonomy of the individual is a myth. We are all dependent first on our parents, family and social circles, and more broadly on the education, resources, services, industry, technology and agriculture of fellow members of society. A truly ’autonomous individual’ would not survive more than a few days. We are all reliant on and responsible for each other, and to encourage self-interest and competition destroys our natural network and capacity to develop ourselves and our projects.

[3] Rich people are not rich just because they have made choices which are more beneficial to themselves and others, but because they have been given numerous advantages which had nothing to do with their choices. Social position (and consequently education, contracts in industry, and good health) and natural attributes (like strength, intelligence and bravery) are in fact nothing but the arbitrary gifts of birth; indeed, ultimately, the propensity to work hard is not something chosen, but something we are born with. Those are not advantages that people deserve.

[4] Socialism is perfectly compatible with hard work, creativity and progress. In a socialist system where the ideology of cooperation is properly projected, no one will seek to be lazy and ’free-ride’ off the achievements of others. Moreover, by giving people a basic safety net, socialism allows them to take the kind of risks that lead to great artistic or scientific advances and so makes society better off.

[5] Large-scale industries (such as a staterun health or education service) are more efficient than smaller ones through economies of scale. There is also a ’third way’ compatible with socialist ideology, which allows some competition while still retaining ultimate state control of important services.

Possible motions

This House believes that capitalism is a force for good in the world.

This House believes that it is time for workers of the world to unite.

This House believes that capitalism is the best economic system.

Related topics

Marxism

Privatisation

Welfare state

State pensions, ending provision of

Salary capping, mandatory

Bonuses, banning of

Private schools

Inheritance tax at 100 per cent

University education, free for all

Failing companies, bailing out

Fairtrade, we should not support

Sport, regretting the commercialisation of