
- photo by DC Curry
I’m not an economist, nor am I an expert in economic systems.
Even so, I did attend my Government & Economics class in High School, and I have given more than a cursory glance to the New Testament. At age 55, I realize I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I do have rudimentary knowledge of some of the core values undergirding the considerable control a society exerts over a nation’s wealth and property.
I’ve recently noticed a growing interest in the global economy, and America’s recent conflagration of economic upheaval has sparked vigorous debate across the country.
I have some thoughts.
And, I have a blog.
So, let me weigh in with my ruminations on Capitalism, Socialism and Communism.
Socialism strives for the complimentary merger of two opinions: Thomas Jefferson's well-known, "All men are created equal," and Karl Marx's "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." (Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, The Portable Marx, tr. Eugene Kamenka (New York: Penguin Books, 1983) 541.)
Capitalism provides the individual with the freedom needed to achieve the first part of Marx’s dream, “from each according to his ability,” and relies on the presumption that individuals have sufficient capacity to leverage their abilities, cooperate and work hard to produce goods and services…which will meet their own needs. Capitalists believe these profits provide incentive.
Three fundamental questions face all economies: What should we produce? How should we produce? For whom should we produce? Capitalists believe individuals in a free-market should answer these questions, rather than government officials, tyrants or kings.
This notion is not far from basic biblical teaching which calls God’s people to add value, live with generosity and work hard so “God’s Kingdom will come, and God’s will is done, on earth as it is in heaven.” In fact, Paul wrote Christians these instructions:
2 Thessalonians 3:7-12 (NIV)
For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone's food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to make ourselves a model for you to follow. For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat.” We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies. Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the bread they eat.
Capitalism assumes Marx’s mandate “to each according to his needs,” is addressed by cooperation, an abundance-mindset and freedom. It is Capitalism’s insistence that the potential for individual profit provides incentive for labor and capital investment that motivates individuals to care for those who cannot provide for themselves.
The Bible is rife with instruction on caring for the helpless and poor – for those who cannot provide for themselves. God’s prophet, Micah declared:
Micah 6:8 (NIV)
He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.
The question we must ask is, “How? By what means?”
Cogitation continues and the obvious emerges.
Socialists have a conviction; everyone’s needs can be met. Yet, socialists recoil at the severe restrictions on human freedom inherent to Communism’s totalitarian reality.
In the Manifesto, Karl Marx lodges a complaint against socialists who “want all the advantages of modern social conditions without the struggles and dangers necessarily resulting therefrom.” (Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, The Portable Marx, tr. Eugene Kamenka (New York: Penguin Books, 1983) 235.) He recoiled at Socialists espousing their love for life in a Marxian society without a dictatorship of the proletariat. He called such thinking, “Utopian,” and insisted fairness – the ultimate goal of Socialism – was elusive.
Since Socialism reduces incentive for production, and sacrifices individual economic freedoms for a ubiquitous notion of “fairness” - and vaguely defined “social good” - most dictionaries define Socialism as “a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism.”
In other words, it’s a slippery slope.
The Greek philosopher Plato perfectly described Communism’s ideal:
You'll find the ideal society and state, and the best code of laws, where the old saying "friends' property is genuinely shared" is put into practice as widely as possible throughout the entire state. Now I don't know whether in fact this situation—community of wives, children and all property—exists anywhere today, or will ever exist, but at any rate in such a state the notion of "private property" will have been by hook or by crook completely eliminated from life. Everything possible will have been done to throw into a sort of common pool even what is by nature "my own," like eyes and ears and hands, in the sense that to judge by appearances they all see and hear and act in concert. Everybody feels pleasure and pain at the same things, so that they all praise and blame with complete unanimity. To sum up, the laws in force impose the greatest possible unity on the state. (Plato, Laws, 739c-d, Plato: Complete Works, tr. Trevor J. Saunders, ed. John M. Cooper (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1997) 1420.)
Hence, Communism is not mere economic theory. Communism is the tyranny of all over one, of society over the individual. Communism’s goal is not only to abolish personal property; it seeks to abolish religion, culture, nationality, family and every celebration of individuality. Its aim and end is conformity, making the society and the individual one and the same.
I’ve heard people say early Christians were Communists. I couldn’t disagree more. Christians freely give what they have, sharing with those in need. Communists take what others have and redistribute it as the State deems best. It was the personal generosity of Christ’s first followers that helped turn the world upside down, not their acquiescence to Communistic tyranny.
So, if Socialism is – as the dictionary says – “a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism,” – I think we would be well-advised to resist it.
Like I said, I'm not an economist, but that’s my opinion.
What’s yours?
Winston Churchill said, “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” (House of Commons, October 22, 1945)
2 Thessalonians 3:7-12 (NIV)
For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone's food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to make ourselves a model for you to follow. For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies. Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the bread they eat.