Take, for example, Marxism. It is not a very developed socio-economic theory. Itevolved solely as a reaction to capitalist exploitation. With this viewpoint,Marxism came to see human beings primarily as economic, material beings,thereby sealing its fate versus the more receptive capitalism. Today we know thatthe combination of communes and economic centralization is self-contradictoryand detrimental to individual and collective growth. Furthermore, we understandthat we cannot follow Marx and do away with the surplus value. Which Marxistcountry did not enhance their empire with the help of surplus value created bythe profit-oriented world market? From where will future momentum come, if notfrom genuine surplus value created through proper utilization of availableresources?Marxist countries did try to apply certain socio-economic measures, claiming thatthese were humane and progressive. Today we know that they were grosslyinhumane and regressive, so much so that Marxism is viewed as a destructiveand very dogmatic “ism.” This is common knowledge, not because we all havecome to read the complete volumes of Das Kapital, but because Marxist theory ina short time greatly damaged large regions of the world. Still, this deficient theorymanaged to attract world-wide attention on the strength of its analysis of capitalist profit accumulation and its vision of an egalitarian society. Theideological vacuum left after the collapse of Marxism is indeed menacing anddemands positive replacement at the earliest opportunity.Then there is capitalism, a far more deeply entrenched socio-economicpathology, well into its old age. The development of capitalist philosophy reflectedthe growth of the money-motivated class. Historically, the business or commercial class did not evolve as a reaction to exploitation, but rather due to adesire to seize and enhance society’s capital. Capitalism’s present worlddominance indicates its shrewd ability to accommodate various humansentiments. It subdues and streamlines religious, martial, ethnic and variousother social forces and trends, converting them into profitable tools. Marxism,being utterly materialistic, could never properly understand the awesomeimplications of this special adaptive force of capitalism. With its liberal ideas andunparalleled buying power, capitalism builds and controls the world we live in.Consequently, we know a good deal about its positive and negative sides.Whether or not free trade, the unrestricted hoarding of wealth and other liberalistic principles may be of further positive use for humanity is another pointthat will be discussed herein.Most people do have an opinion on socio-economic matters, such as politics,food, clothing, housing, education and health care, as these matters are of greatimportance to all. However, only a very few are formally trained in these fields.The rest of us just apply our common sense, basing our opinions on personalexperience and whatever information we may have access to. So naturally, weought to make a few attempts to understand the present socio-economic set-up,
Leave a Comment