Jaicee said:
Without defending what the government of Venezuela has become, I take exception to the claim that socialist ideas are averse to human nature. There is no socio-economic system of organization more traditional to our species than democratic socialism. In fact, even the most complex, capitalistic societies often still instinctively revert back to socialistic principles when in real need. For example, when a natural disaster strikes and yields a severe shortage of basic necessities like food, clean drinking water, and clothing, any given society is prone to respond by imposing a system of rationing: the distribution of those sorts of basic resources according to need rather than according to exchange value. Why? Why not let the free market work its magic and solve these sorts of serious problems on its own? Because deep down, we know better. We instinctively know that the result would be more loss of life. A capitalist economic system is better at certain things than a socialist one is. Solving the most basic human problems, like a severe shortage of basic resources, though, isn't one of them. Capitalism can produce things more efficiently. It distributes those things less efficiently though. You see what I'm getting at here? |
Giving aid to people during disasters is not socialism, that's taking care of your own people or being a good person. The countries you're referring to are not socialist countries. Safety nets are not socialist. Socialist ideals are antithetical to human nature and that's why it doesn't work. People like to own property and keep the things they work for. Humans by nature are meritocratic. Even nature is.
