Look, in the past, there were three great currents, all with a big followers.Liberalism, conservatism and socialism. Besides nationalism, but that’s just for another time.
- The capitalists were in the cities, mostly middle-class citizens.
These are also directly the Liberals.
Afraid of socialism because it would be negative for them (in the 19th century).
At one point (1848), you saw that the Liberals were given quite a lot of power.Revolutions flew through Europe, and constitutions were adapted by means of liberal visions, so also in our Netherlands.
Thorbecke-Our own liberal
But yes, when those liberals were at the top they saw that not everyone agreed with (or met) their views.
Not everyone was rational, not everyone was educated, not everyone agreed with the Laissez-Faire policy. So what did they do? They shut themselves down, watching a small interest group; The middle class. And by this decision, the Liberals were essentially conservative, given that it was now the Socialists who fought for social change. The Liberals now wanted to retain their position for as long as possible.
Well, and we still see that now.Right and left. Conservative and progressive. Capitalist and socialist. The conservatism has not disappeared, it has merged with the (economic) liberalism.
And that is why socialism is the only alternative to capitalism at this time.
Conservatism was originally also an alternative to liberalism and laissez-faire capitalism.Later, there were still currents like nationalism and fascism. More recently, you have the Christian democracy and the authoritarian populist alternatives.
According to most, they are indeed right in front of each other.If you are not capitalist then you are communist and vice versa. That’s because the world also looked a bit like the second half of the last century. There were two ideologies (or one ideology and a system that thinks it will be good as long as we have little intervention) that faced each other, which is why people often think they are opposites. In many respects, they are also, but there are also similarities to it. Because they are seen a lot as opposites, they are also seen a lot as the only possibilities (if you do not want hot tea then you apparently want iced tea).
Socialism is about dividing the capital among the people, capitalism aims to enable individuals to raise as much capital as possible, even if it is at the expense of others.So in socialism it is about everyone’s good, capitalism allows you to enrich yourself at the expense of others.
Often socialism is accused of being guilty of murder and manslaughter.However, this is not the fault of socialism, but of a group of idiots who could no longer face reality. Capitalism is, however, guilty of most wars. Under the guise of ‘ restoring democracy ‘, governments were deposited and the people were plunged into poverty. The ultimate goal, however, was to expand, manage soil treasures or to suppress socialism, which still poses a danger to capitalism.
In The Netherlands we have a social democracy, this is a form of socialism.Although the individual is paramount, we do care for each other. We have e.g. A good sickness cost system. In The United States, however, the capitalist Republicans have eroded the care system and health insurance is priceless.
A system in which the goal is to take care of your fellow man instead of outside him is not an alternative, no other choice, but the only right choice.
Because people have forgotten or are badly taught in communism and Marxism, and the millions of deaths that this regime has brought in the name of equality of outcome.
What makes the 芒 鈧?艙westerse芒 鈧?thought good so profitable for the world is its focus on the individual and not the group.
Things like 芒 鈧?艙the rights of the mens芒 鈧?have emerged from this turn in thinking away from the group because suddenly everyone was held accountable for his own individual rights and duties.
Capitalism, despite its mistakes, is still the best working distribution model we all see the benefits of worldwide today.Partly because it functions objectively and the individual rewarded for his individual contribution to society.
Just stand still at the global poverty 40 years back and where it is now.Just remember that products have become cheaper in general. (where high distress is, is a big market, so also a lot of competition in the capitalist system that optimizes the product) A simple example is the phone to GSM transition and the cost of this product in the last years.
Everyone is now carrying a minicomputer (GSM) that has the same computing power or more as the computer that used the Apolo mission (I remember so a statement, but factcheck that FF to be sure)
TL; Dr. People who want to know about capitalism understand how advantageous this system has been for humanity on a global level and how much progress that has brought and still produces.
I think many of them have not yet opened a history book and have said that we have already tested legal nationalism and links socialism in the past and have produced millions of deaths.
But of course you can always expect a hybris answer like 芒 鈧?艙but we’re going to do it better, which just implies a lack of human knowledge.
Just read some books about those times and how ordinary people do the most unthinkable things in the name for their 芒 鈧?艙utopie芒 鈧?built on corpses or fearing to become a number in a grave list themselves.
A well-known alternative is fascism, but we do not want it.
There are a lot of political parties in the Netherlands, so you would say that there are plenty of alternatives.For almost all of them (excluding small parties such as NCPN), they would like to let the business community go its course (the Libertarian Party), or to force it into a straightjacket of rules (the Greens, Christians, social Democrats, etc. ). Even under fascism, capitalism retains a lot of influence and the state cannot do without its support.