Communism vs Capitalism - Essay Example

College: Communism versus Capitalism The debate staged by Herodotus in The Histories involving three eminent Persians concerns which form of government among democracy, oligarchy, and monarchy is the best. Otanes supported democracy; Megabyzus recommended oligarchy, whereas Darius supported monarchy. Eventually, the final vote among the seven men present settled on monarchy as the preferred form of government. The common political philosophy between these three forms of government is that all of them are based on a similar social order. Society constitutes several classes based on the economic status of its members. In the monarchical form of government, the sole ruler has absolute power, but does not limit the wealth that individuals in society can amass. The same goes for oligarchy and democracy, where there is no common ownership of society’s means of production. These forms of government permit individuals to undertake a certain economic activity, and they privately own the resources they amass from these productive activities, with the only provision being that individuals must dedicate a certain share of their income to the state or the ruling authority (Aubrey, 210). In contrast with this capitalistic social order, Plato stages a debate regarding a communist social order in his philosophical work, The Republic. Plato argues against the notion that the guardian classes of the ideal city can live without private property. He criticizes the arguments of philosophers such as Socrates who assert that limitations should be put on the amount of private property the guardian classes, who constituted the lowest classes in Greek city state society, can own. However, this limitation does not extend to the ruling class and, therefore, the leadership structure is not altered in any way by this form of social ownership of property. Therefore, communism can function in all the three common types of government; democracy, oligarchy, and monarchy. In addition, Socrates goes further and proposes the abolition of private families, which Plato opposes. According to Socrates’ philosophy, spouses and children should be shared just like property, in a society structured upon communism. Plato asserts that living without private property and private families is not an issue for the majority of people. However, he does not articulate a clear stand regarding the issue. On the other hand, critics of communism in The Republic argue that no one is capable of living without private property (Plato, 301). A key difference of political philosophy that is evident between Herodotus’s Persian debate and Plato’s debate on the ideal city is the issue of ownership of property in the society. The Persian debaters advocate for three different forms of government, but all of them support the ideology of ownership of private property within these forms of government. However, in Plato’s debate, the debaters retain the three forms of government, but the ownership of property is an issue. Here, the participants debate the suitability of the social order of communism, with the overall opinion seeming to lean in favor of communism. The issue of ownership of property in the community has been in contention for centuries. Some groups have advocated for it, whereas others have opposed it. In particular, the issue blew to enormous proportions during the Cold War when the U.S. and the U.S.S.R engaged in a vicious rivalry due to their differing ideologies concerning this issue. The U.S. advocated for Capitalism and the private ownership of property, whereas the U.S.S.R advocated for the communal ownership of property. Ownership of Means of Production The capitalism vs. Communism debate has been raging for decades now and represents a battle between two extreme socioeconomic theories. These theories represent two intrinsically differing ways of thinking. Capitalism is extremely individualistic while communism is communal-oriented and its main focus is putting the society before the individual self. The importance of this debate cannot be underestimated since it polarized almost the entire world during the Cold War. The differences between these two socioeconomic theories are quite distinct as portrayed by the Herodotus Persian debate and Plato’s debate in The Republic. The principal feature which distinguishes the two theories is the matter of ownership of the means and sources of production. Communism disapproves the private ownership of any vital resources such as land. Instead, it endorses ownership by the state of all the essential resources and means of production such as land. The state here means the entire community. This means that the entire land on which the community lives on or is part of the community’s environment, and any other vital resources that enable the production of goods and provision of essential services belong to every member of the society. Therefore, the entire community shares the privilege of making all decisions concerning the production of goods. In essence, this promotes a democratic form of government. However, this is not always the case since, in the past, there have been communist societies governed by authoritarian leaderships, which suppress the citizens’ right of taking part in the decision-making process. In addition, in communist societies, everyone receives equal wages so that there is no difference in socioeconomic status (Phatak, buzzle.com). In contrast with communism, capitalism endorses the private ownership of means of production and land. Every person has to support himself by engaging in a productive activity so as to earn his worth. As a result, the majority share of the profits that a business incurs go to the person who bears ownership of the means of production, whereas the workers responsible for running the means of production get only a small share as salaries and wages. The owner of the means of production determines the amount of wages each person gets in accordance with merit and sometimes also due to the preference of the owner. Therefore, the owners of the means of production, fundamentally known as capitalists, have the privilege of making all the decisions, although they can decide to delegate some decision-making powers to subordinates. Thus, the bone of contention between these two ideologies lies with the ownership of the means of production. Both types of ownership have their merits and demerits. Communism fosters social cohesion and improved societal relationships. Therefore, social ills are less common in communist societies. However, it kills the capacity of individual enterprise, which in turn inhibits innovation. Innovation is the essential the driver of technological advancement, and when it is absent societies tend to remain backward in terms of improved means of carrying out tasks and producing goods and services. On the other hand, capitalism fosters individual enterprise, innovation, and consequently, technological advancement. However, it concentrates too much power and wealth in a small portion of the society who then acquires the means of exploiting the rest of the community (Plato, 291). Individual Freedom Another key contrasting point of view between capitalism and communism is the issue of individual freedom. Communism requires the individual to put the society before self, whereas capitalism values freedom of the individual above the society so long as it does not limit the freedom or welfare of other members of the society. Therefore, the issue of Individualism versus Social Welfare precipitates a massive polarity between communism and capitalism. Capitalism fosters people’s inherent selfish nature by giving more importance to their individual aspirations than to those of the society. This is quite convenient since every human being has an inherent selfish nature which arises due to the inborn instinct of self-preservation. On the other hand, communism appeals to the saintly side of people, requiring them to put others before themselves. This is a noble notion. It encourages people to suppress their inherent selfish nature by appealing to their generous side. These two points of view are extreme and far apart and have their merits and demerits. Individual enterprise, creativity and innovation, are a product of people’s self-serving tendencies and have brought about enormous advances in human history, which have benefited the society tremendously. Communism has a tendency to kill individual creativity since it dictates to a person what he should do and how he should do it. Therefore, it suppresses original thinking. On the other hand, capitalism satisfies selfish desires and often gives rise to capitalist aristocrats who yield control over the lives of thousands or even millions of people leading to exploitation (Aubrey, 209). Social Class The theory of communism advocates an egalitarian society that is not segregated into classes. Everyone is equal due to the fact that they have the same economic footing. Since they have no need to compete against each other for scarce economic resources, there is less rivalry leading to reduced conflict in the society. In addition, communism fosters the breakdown of racial, religious, and national barriers in society (Plato, 287). However, the implementation of a societal structure without such divisions is difficult because people have the tendency to hold on to the minor things that make them different and from others and unique. In contrast with communism, capitalism promotes the distinction of class. In fact, it creates two broad classes, the rich and the poor, and has a tendency to make the divide between these two groups wider and wider. The haves get richer while the have-nots get poorer because the rich have control of the means of production. This control bestows upon them great power in the society, and they are able to allocate to themselves a larger share of the scare resources available. Since resources are fixed, an increase in the share of resources held by the rich automatically leads to a decrease in the proportion held by the poor, further widening the economic divide (Phatak, buzzle.com). Conclusion The three forms of government debated in The Histories by Herodotus all have their own advantages and advantages. However, each of the three debaters favored only one of two socioeconomic theories which differ markedly from each other, capitalism. Plato’s debate in The Republic partly favored the contrasting socioeconomic theory, communism. Thus, the key difference in political philosophy that emerged between the two debates is the suitability of the two types of socioeconomic theory for an ideal state. Both theories have their advantages and disadvantages. None seems superior to the other. The issue of which among them is the most suitable in order to create the ideal state depends on the unique needs of a certain society. Works Cited Aubrey, de Selincourt. Herodotus: the Histories. New York: Penguin Books Ltd., 1972. Phatak, Omar. Communism vs. Capitalism. Buzzle, 2011. Retrieved 5 Dec 2012, from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/communism-vs-capitalism.html Plato. The Republic. Retrieved 5 Dec 2012, from http://www.idph.com.br/conteudos/ebooks/republic.pdf Read More