Banner Rotate

Logo by Julian Spanos

Antitheistic. Long. Perplexing. Offensive. Whatever.

Warning: This blog does not cater to your whims. If you are offended, then I am not obliged to care. It ain't personal until otherwise stated.

Random Quotes

Monday, February 13, 2006

Socialism vs. Free Market - Part INFINITY!

Another day, and yet another articulation of a subplot of watching an American liberal butt heads with a pro-free market centrist. Hey, the centrist stated himself that he doesn’t like to be lumped into the category of Republican, holistically; I don’t blame him.

It was a good debate; it showed that civil arguments can also take place, and the two bastards actually settled the matter on a respectful acknowledgement of their disagreement.

Interestingly enough, myself and another individual who were caught up in between the talk, ended up taking on the brunt of the criticism. It was fuckin’ hilarious, because one minute, we were being viewed as a bunch of fuckin’ staunch conservatives; the other moment, we were being thought of as some kind of obscure liberals.

The socialist, who described himself as a ‘Zealot Progressive,’ expressed the desire for his nation to fall under the rule of a true socialist leader. Well, I was warm enough to avoid blunt critique this time round, so I decided to sugar coat the response by claiming that I’d like to believe in such an ideal. However, before I could get to the meat of my response, the other spectator decided to complete what I was gonna’ say. He said that a fuckin’ angel would be needed at the helm of such authority, and that did pretty much sum up my point: one would still have to rely on an exceptionally linear and righteous frame of mind, which is a modern-day myth.

The centrist jumped at the comment, praising the critic for his accurate but rather blunt rhetoric. He reiterated the same point and claimed that it would be an impossible scenario, and that ‘Free Market’ is an actual solution, and one with viable prospects. This time I was the first to respond, but once again, the other, sharper knife in the drawer beat me to the follow-up. He added that a free market would allow the corporation(s) to gain monopoly control, and take economic well-being of the suffering individuals ala ‘small guys,’ hostage. Need I even mention the socialist’s reaction to that comment? Of course, he was once again in full agreement.
So where did this place the two of us? That being myself and this other ominous critic, whom I shall refer to as ‘The Critic.’ I wasn’t against any of the ideas per se, but rather, the fundamental essence of a relatively corruption prone human psychology, and thus my wary faith in the longevity of these systems as far as the prosperity of the lil’ guys was concerned, because a -human- psychology would still be controlling the helm of either of the machines/systems.

“Kade, you nihilistic bastard!” some might be exclaiming at this point, and I couldn’t give a fuck. Seriously, use whatever term you must use; I am merely remaining dedicated to my pessimistic opinion on the general human mindset, especially that which is product of a power dynamic. Material success, control and power are notorious for getting into the heads of many, and our own unconscious is divinely infamous for coming up with all forms of personal rationalisations in order to come to terms with our own follies; the human conscience is a bleeding shell of something that could never assert itself from the start. Of course, I am no fool either; I am making a grand generalisation, and wouldn’t necessarily disqualify the possibility of some strong exceptions to this general point of view. However, my overall perspective on the matter remains consistently negative; I don’t believe any system could work with an actual human psyche at its helm, period.

“Apples and oranges, you psychotic twit! Corporations are different!” -- Argue some of the capitalism gurus!

Correct, it is a different concept; but that’s the point, I am not basing my pessimism on a system, or similarity of system per se. My contention rides on the idea of one constant in all conceived systems: the general profile of a materialistic human psychology, manipulating the system from its nucleus. You see, when the centrist so eagerly reinforced the critic's rebuttal for the socialist, being that an angel would be required at the helm; the centrist effectively shot down his own concept of free and prospering corporations, just as well. After all, despite the basic differences, you’d still have to gamble a great deal on the upper tier of most of these corporations, which means more angels would be required at the helm. So yeah, popular psychology is quite beautiful, seeing as it pretty much shoots down both points with the same argument, and effectively demonstrates the underlying folly that can turn both philosophies into a cold agenda: the typically greedy mindset of the modern-day humans.

This is not to say that I condemn either one of the systems per se, I think in theory, they’re fine. It’s just that factoring in an entirely sporadic and somewhat greedy human nature into the trifle, greatly changes the complexion of the whole ordeal.

“Give me proof that you’ve got an angelic leader, and I’ll follow a socialist! For that matter, give me a guarantee that all corporate CEOs and their cronies are angels, and I’ll consider free market, global salvation! You see, my problem is with the people, not the system! I ain’t trustin’ a sentient human! Because I am THAT damn cynical!” -- Final thoughts.

Just drop it and realise that dissolution is absolute, and that partial stability should be cherished for all that it is worth; you never know when that glass will go completely empty. And for fuck‘s sake, just drop the whole wrestling feud between the socialist ideal and the free market philosophy. Systems don't screw people, people screw people, and their respective systems.

Stay gree… err, cool, fuckers!


No comments: