A tale of three ideologies. The irony of the bad ideology being the closest to desired.
Imagine a world where everyone has an equal amount of wealth (i.e. property, money, happiness and basically access to the same social benefits), right? Well, as that could be the ideal way to live, it certainly is for an unreal world. Communism preaches this gospel but most agree that it is a dangerous venture to preach this gospel. Then, what is wrong with every one being equal? Human nature is; life in itself is.
Dictionary.com defines equal as indicating a correspondence in all respects or in a particular respect. Though humanitarians describe equal a person or thing of the same quality or with the same status, rights, etc., I beg to differ by suggesting that in reality there is no such thing as equal. People are just not of the same height, neither color tones, nor body mass, nor intellectual abilities nor physical abilities. People have different egos, thus it is just impossible to impose a communist ideology on them. They may accept at first but when nature takes is course, then all will fall apart.
Then socialism is the way, right? Wait… what is socialism to begin with? …“a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” Sounds just like communism to me. But wait, we all agree we cannot literary be equal but if we have means of production, distribution, and exchange owned or regulated by the community we’re good.
Not so fast. But how will this be done? The government owns or operates the means of production distributing them equally to everyone. Meaning the people have equal opportunity to thrive, but here Workers receive what they need to produce and survive, but there’s no incentive to achieve more, leaving little motivation? Or the government does just that but polices and regulates matters so that the more hardworking/gifted do not benefit more than the less hardworking or less gifted from the equal opportunities. Ah?
Socialism sounds somewhat more applicable compared to communism but both sound to be different versions of the same thing. The idea behind socialism and communism sounds good in a perfect world where people are just clones of themselves with equal characteristics and abilities. But in reality, equal is just another term relevant in math. There is no such thing as equal opportunity as some may sacrifice a lot more just for others to have the same leverage to incentives.
There is on the other hand a seemingly evil ideology, the “bad guy” Capitalism. An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state (“the obvious and simple system of natural liberty”). The state being police ensuring all practices are carried out fairly. Subject to certain restrictions, individuals (alone or with others) are free to decide where to invest, what to produce or sell, and what prices to charge. There is no natural limit to the range of their efforts in terms of assets, sales, and
profits; or the number of customers, employees, and investors; or whether they operate in local, regional, national, or international markets.
Capitalism is not void of flaws but in my opinion the closest to addressing the factor of “the Human Nature” thus in this case the bad good.
This is not an in depth dig into these three ideologies but rather a shallow dig into what each of them and what they stand for. In conclusion however, all these theories were created with man’s good at heart. They all have their benefits and flaws. It is however advisable for economies to take the benefits of all these ideology, deduce a common ground and come up with a solution that creates better living for people while considering the “Human nature”.
