Dear Editor,
There is a fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism as models of economic development. Capitalism is essentially based on the exploitation of the majority for the benefit of the few. By contrast, socialism, as a theoretical construct, is a system of production and distribution in which the fruits of human labour are intended to be distributed in a fair and equitable manner and where there is no exploitation of man by man. It is clear from the above that socialism as a mode of production and distribution is inherently superior to that of capitalism, or for that matter any other socio-economic system which existed hitherto.
Some people mistakenly, or perhaps deliberately, associate socialism with several vices and shortcomings experienced in many countries which are pursuing a path of development which is different from the IMF-World Bank dictated neo-liberal model. The ‘invisible hand’ of the market is projected as the preferred mechanism to determine resource allocation without due regard to what is in the best interest of consumers and society as a whole.
The profit motive takes precedence over the basic needs of society, and every item produced must justify its existence on the anvil of market principles.
It is worth noting that the basic needs approach inherent in a socialist economic model has nothing in common with shortages, long lines for consumer items, the hoarding of goods in order to create artificial shortages and the several other ‘evils’ that are taking place in neighbouring Venezuela.
These are all aberrations of the socialist way of life and have resulted from deliberate attempts to make socialism look bad by detractors, mainly from political and ideological considerations.
As a socio-economic formation, socialism is, historically speaking, merely taking baby steps and mistakes and miscalculations will inevitably be made. Besides, the capitalistic ethic based on individualism and material accumulation is still highly entrenched in the psyche of a critical population mass which makes it difficult for socialism to take root and prosper as it should.
This is consistent with the laws of dialectical and historical materialism in which the old will eventually give way to the new, but only after a prolonged struggle of the opposites.
I thought of sharing these few thoughts if only to correct certain misconceptions about socialism as a development model and at the same time to draw attention to the fact that the poverty and deprivation which have engulfed more than half of the world’s population is the direct result of an economic and production mode that places profits for the few ahead of the interests and concerns of the broad masses of people.
Yours faithfully,
Hydar Ally
