Democratic Socialism 1

“Capitalism vs Socialism. (my view)

In Capitalism: the principle question is, 'is it profitable?' The system is built around figures. Conscience is an Unwanted guest in the board room.

In Socialism: the principle question is, 'is it right?' The system is built around the people. Conscience is Lord in the board room.

Socialism has failed. Capitalism is failing...

I think our solution lies somewhere in between these two systems. Tilting in favour of socialism though”

Taulpaul Oselen Via Facebook 15 Nov 11.

The Capitalist West celebrated the demise of Communist Russia, not only as a test of presumed superiority of Capitalism over Communism, but also as it marks end of the Cold War. Today, Cuba, would also be watching with keen interest as economic crises deepens in the capitalist countries. Perhaps, none of the two is as good as it claims.

Communism, which is the very corrupt version of Karl Max doctrine of socialism, creates a very powerful proletariat class, which holds in trust the collective wealth of the people. This class determines what to produce, how to produce, when to produce and even for whom. In essence, they determine the principle question what is right. Given such absolute power, it is not too difficult to envisage its eventual demise as more and more people are continuously alienated from the decision making process.

Capitalism which has lasted for a longer period is at present facing its own challenges. It may not be easy to sound its death knell now. But whatever the outcome, one could expect that the government would have to subsidies corporate greed and corruption for a long time, which in itself goes against the very principle of capitalism. Capitalism preaches minimal involvement of government in the economy of a country. However, today the government of USA, UK, Italy and Greece are spending billions of dollars as a bail out to what are strictly, private investments with no permanent solution in sight.

Between both ideologies is the adoption of democracy as the means to power albeit with different interpretation. While the communist countries are one party states with little tolerance for opposition, (a fact which is clearly antithetical to the spirit of socialism) the capitalist countries adopted the multi party democracy in order to give the people the delusion of choices and promptly labelled themselves liberal democracy's. In the real sense although the parties differs, the decision makers and their decisions remain the same. That is why the difference between Obama and Bush he replaced was just in the colour of their skin. Corporate interest can never be separated from National Interest.

The most popular definition of democracy was given as “the government of the people, by the people and for the people”. This was accepted as ‘true’ simply because of the man who stated it. Can we in all honesty, equate the rituals of selection as democracy with this meaning attached to it? If governments produced under democracy are the true representative of their people, would there be any need for protest of any kind?