Mario,
Again, thanks for your response. I well know the case for being against the
tried out communist systems e.g in the former Soviet Union. I spent three
weeks there in 1967, and although warmly welcomed as an Indian wherever I
travelled, by car, I saw at first hand, how bureaucracy and authoritarianism
actually worked in a police state. I also spent, at other times, periods in
the other Eastern bloc countries where Soviet hegemony prevailed and know
for certain that, I could not live in those conditions. However, I am not
entirely persuaded by your claim of how successful free enterprise within
capitalism is and as also discussed briefly by Fred Noronha. I have serious
doubts about the trickle-down theory. Indeed, there is much in the serious
literature to indicate that the gap between the well to do and the poor in
the USA has widened ever so detrimentally in recent years. The measure of
this kind of gap is also deemed to be a good yardstick internationally, to
ascertain how well or how badly citizens are doing in a given country.
Unfortunately, at present, my sources from the USA itself, and elsewhere,
are not terribly positive about progress on this count in your country. In
short, it could do a lot lot better.
I think capitalism is wonderful for the winners, (I admit to being one), but
relatively painful for those who fall by the wayside in such a system
through no fault of their own. I also see it as ruthlessly exploitative of
man and the environment and am not enamoured by its inherent orientation to
satisfy human desire/greed rather than human need.
I regret I do not have much time currently, to press on with this debate
between us, much as I relish it, on the merits, or not, of the economic
system in the USA but would like to indicate that I have a preference for a
system which mitigates against the harsher realities of capitalism. In this
sense I am much happier within an European model which is capitalistic, no
doubt, but values human beings in theory and practice rather more than
profit predominantly. OK, there are many ups and downs in terms of economic
performance eg. France and Germany at present, but then, Norway and Sweden
seem to be outstanding examples of high taxation, excellent welfare
provision and excellent prosperity. Nowhere there, is there comparable
povery and acute residential segregation as in the USA. OK, I accept that,
residential segregation in the USA, previously institutionalised by law as
in former South Africa, and also 'enforced' by the Klan, in the South, is
now changing, albeit slowly. Yet, I'd rather live, apart from the UK, in a
highly taxed Scandinavian country but which manifestly values human beings
highly too. No doubt there are weaknesses and problems but a visit there by
our American friends on Goanet and on the other network would be
illuminating.
A final thought...if indeed the economic system is so good in the USA, why
is this 'fact' not so persuasive that there would be many more takers for
the system, especially from Western Europe and other relatively prosperous
countries? You might say that, aka Marx, that it is a case of false
consciousness on my part, but the evidence of poverty in the USA,
crime/imprisonment and other pathologies etc does undermine the suggestion
that unadulterated capitalism there works so well, as to be a model for the
rest of the world. You have often asked about India and China now taking the
capitalist route but I have to say that the levels of poverty in both these
countries are likely to get even worse than they are, and sadly, human life
cheapened for the many cogs in the capitalist machine, even more, in the
interests of those who succeed materially.
Yet, I am willing to be persuaded by you that I could be entirely wrong in
everything I have said above! Please ignore any typos etc as I have done
this post at speed.
Cornel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mario Goveia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <goanet@goanet.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 5:15 AM
Subject: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Cornel,
I will see what I can find. However, the ruins and
misery from Karl Marx's ideology are strewn around the
world, from the old Soviet Union to China, India and
much of Africa and South America. Some, like India,
which had a committment to democratic principles
learned from the Brits, did not go to the extremes of
communism, but all of the victimized countries, with
the possible exception of Myanmar, N. Korea and Cuba,
have thrown Marxism into the dustbin of history, where
it belongs.
The defect in Marxism lies in the contempt and lack of
respect for the average citizen. A small cabal of
elites sought to tell everyone else what was good and
bad for them. Since being controlled by someone else
is not the normal human condition, this led inevitably
to totalitarianism, since that was the only way to
keep the proletariat under the control of the ideas of
the elites. The bureaucrats that ran the day to day
affairs had no incentive to solve any problem, as this
would make them obsolete. Results always trend down
to the least common denominator.
The simple beauty of the free-enterprise system is
that the decisions are made by millions of individual
buyers and sellers, each looking out for their own
long-term interests, which includes the self-serving
need to be good stewards of their assets and resources
and the environment around them. Incompetence,
inefficiency and inconveniences are never tolerated
for very long, because it is in someone's economic
interest to fix it. Competition forces efficiency,
and obsolescence leads to renewal retraining and
re-directed effort, keeping the pot boiling as it
were. The result is the rising tide that lifts all
boat.
In the US, the closest system to a pure
free-enterprise system in a country of any size, the
one thing everyone can count on is that competition
will ensure that things will change, almost always for
the better over the long run.
--- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mario,
Thank you for your response. While I can find hundreds of references
which
basically debate with the ghost of Marx as a great thinker, I wonder if
you
can provide some references which see him utterly negatively in the
specific way you have described? I would welcome such info.
