Socialism vs. Capitalism V” : The Human Problem
Socialism vs. Capitalism V” : The Human Problem
By
Ken Eliasberg
Thus far we have looked at these competing philosophies — socialism and capitalism — from either a political or economic standpoint. The real differences cut much deeper; the left and right look at 2 things in a very different manner. What are those 2 things? Human nature and America.
So let’s look at the differences in these contexts.
Human Nature.- The main problem with the left — here and throughout the world — they want to create a Utopia, paradise on earth. In short, they want perfection. As I have repeatedly pointed out, their main problem is not that they don’t understand health care, or the economy, or the environment (although, in point of fact, they do not); their real problem is that they do not understand human nature. We, as people, are not perfect. Moreover, and, again, more to the point, we are not perfectible, and, in the quest to perfect us, the left actually prevents us from being as good as we might be. That is, the perfect is the enemy of the good!. And this does mean that we cannot improve? Of course we can! Indeed, those among us who are reasonably enlightened spend the better part of our lives trying to either shed, or come to terms with, some of our imperfections. It is a journey, not a destination.
What the left refuses to acknowledge, and what our founding fathers clearly recognized and responded to — as well as what most organized Judeo- Christian religions have always acknowledged — is human nature. We are not just imperfect, we are “unequal” in our imperfections!! The race may go to the swiftest, the smartest, the strongest, the luckiest, or even the most dishonest etc., but it doesn’t go to everyone equally. And thank God for that. Why? Because that’s where ambition, ingenuity, creativity, and risk come into play and allows for the evolution of a society as magnificent and privileged as America! I remind the reader that the Declaration of Independence does not guaranty happiness, only the pursuit thereof; it’s attainment lies in the talent and energy with which it is pursued.
The left likes to think of us, not as a group of individuals, differing in any number of characteristics, but as a vast collective, whose members are indistinguishable from one another. Since our society has not evolved in a manner compatible with this line of thinking, the left seeks to intervene to achieve what it considers a more “socially just” outcome, i.e. a redistribution of the wealth, if you will. And when I say wealth here, I am not just referring to money; the left would like us all to look like cookie-cutter creations, indistinguishable in any respect that might result in some one or some group suffering a blow, real or imaginary, to their self esteem. And they have invented and foisted upon us the concept of political correctness to paper over this travesty. In this regard, I commend another excellent article by Charles Murray, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, entitled The Inequality Taboo, which appeared at aei.org on 8/26/05 and was reprinted in, among other places, the September issue of Commentary Magazine. It is a piece well worth reading in that it sheds a great deal of light, not only on the underlying inequality problem, but the nasty and corrosive effect of political correctness on the truth.
The second problem is even more disturbing, and it brings us to the real difference between the Parties; it is not a difference of politics, it is a difference of attitude. Specifically, it is a fundamental difference in the attitude that each Party has with respect to the manner in which they both view and judge America. And this point, which is merely a variation on my human-nature theme, is the fundamental difference between the Parties. People on the right like America, recognize that it is hardly perfect, endorse efforts to make it more perfect, but, in the final analysis, find it very acceptable with all its imperfections, and love it, warts and all. People on the left, however, are not so accepting. They believe that America’s flaws are of a much more fundamental nature, and that what is required is a complete overhaul. And this point, which will, I’m certain, elicit a wealth of protest from lefties, was made abundantly clear by Obama in his pursuit of the Presidency (and has continued to be made clear in his endless criticisms of, and apologies for, this country during his tenure as President). Tell me, how else do you explain Obama’s October 31, 2008 statement “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America” (emphasis supplied). If America is such a great country — and, in my opinion, it is not just great; it is the greatest country in the history of the world — why do we need to be “fundamentally transformed?” And, please, don’t try to spin that language by suggesting that it was either “taken out of context” or “misunderstood,” the tried and tested ways of attempting to wriggle out of a statement that might prove to embarrass its author. No, Obama meant exactly what he said — America is in need of a “fundamental transformation.” He meant what he said, and not only is the statement perfectly consistent with almost every statement that he made on the campaign trail, more to the point, it is consistent with almost every action he has taken since becoming president. To him, America is so deficient (defective?) that only such a fundamental transformation will make us whole. Does this sound familiar? Doesn’t it smack of his wife’s brilliant campaign statements that America is a “mean” country and one in which she had not, to the point of her husband’s nomination, “been proud.” No, lefties don’t just see a baby with dirty bath water, they see a dirty baby, and their remedy is to throw the baby out with the bath water. Help me out here — would you talk to your spouse or your kids that way and convince them that you love them, i.e. we love you, but we think you need a fundamental transformation? I think you’d have a tough time convincing them if that was your pitch.
In short, the differences in this country are far more than political — far more profound, even than the economic differences that separate and distinguish capitalism and socialism. The differences relate to how we view human nature in the first place and how we view America in the second. The first difference is one of understanding; the second, one of attitude — how those on different sides of the political divide see their country! Those on the right see it as it is, flawed but wonderful, and they are open to improving it whenever such improvement does not threaten to undermine the system. Those on the left find the country, as does Obama, unacceptable — in need of a “fundamental transformation.” In this regard, I recommend an excellent column by Michael Medved, entitled The Real Political Divide: Attitudes Toward America, which appeared at townhall.com on September 16, 2009.