Texts of General Interest (link)
March 13, 2023
Speaking politically and economically, which is the best system?
.png)
Image (public domain): Nineteenth-century painting by Philipp Foltz depicting the Athenian politician Pericles delivering his famous funeral oration in front of the Assembly. Source for the image: a faithful photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional, public domain work of art. Uploaded by the user Cheposo. Source: Wikipedia. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#/media/File:Discurso_funebre_pericles.PNG
An ideal political system is utopian, as humans will eventually degenerate it!
Overview
In the last two centuries, the political and
economic system that has prevailed worldwide is capitalism. These days it seems
so uncontrolled that it is not for the laypeople's benefit but for the
financial Trusts. For this reason, other systems, including social democracy
and e-democracy, have been proposed. Notwithstanding, the question of which is
the best political and economic system is still a matter of controversy and
intense debate.
Capitalism as an economic system has failed. In an individual
spectrum, it fulfills the interests only of the wealthy, while in a broader
range, it meets only the interests of the financial Trusts and the speculators.
It is not even to the advantage of the government’s economy. So, the failure of
capitalism as an ideal economic system means an alternative should be sought.
Social democracy and e-democracy are two alternatives that can be considered.
Social democracy is a modern version of socialism combined with
democracy, as with this adaptation, it accepts the institutions of democracy
that are essential for the state's governing. Historically, socialism in its
initial version was the first stage of communism that theoretically begins with
socialism and ends with communism.
Thus, socialism was born from the doctrines of Marx
and Engels and later was applied as a system in the communist regime of Russia.
However, social democracy is a modernized form of socialism well-known
in Europe, including Germany and Scandinavia. In communism, democracy did not exist, as these two are incompatible! This regime was instead a tyranny
where all means of production belonged to the state, and the mass ‘proletariat’ lived in poor conditions.
Social democracy is the system that has kept some
benefits of classic socialism, such as free access to all levels of education
and health facilities. Social democracy covers the needs of lower financial
classes and disabled people by offering benefits and specific public social
services for vulnerable groups.
Socialism has also kept some features of communism,
such as the need of the state to keep part, like shares, of the production
means and organizations instead of privatizing everything as neoliberals. That
means that by maintaining stocks in organizations, including utility services,
such as electricity, water, and gas supply, and transportation, such as the railways,
the state will benefit from these organizations. Another advantage is that
sensitive sections such as communications and energy are not entirely private.
Moreover, working conditions are protected by the
state, which controls adverse features such as flexible hours, meager wages,
and uninsured personnel that can be easily fired. As a system, it is also
deprived of the chief financial drawback of communism, where lazy and hard-working
employees were paid the same wage, regardless of their productivity and their
level of education, something counterproductive.
E-democracy is another proposed system. It is called ‘internet democracy’ as it is a form of direct democracy where people can take part immediately in the decisions of the state through the internet, as they are asked to decide about all matters. So, they can make direct decisions instead of participating periodically in referendums. It is not merely using the web to access online public services and organizations, but a direct form of democracy, like the one of the Ancient Athens of Pericles in the fifth century B.C. There the Athenians were summoned to decide directly for the matters of their republic, and this was the first form of democracy in history, invented by Clisthenes.
Today, the internet has come to make feasible the idea of direct democracy, as people can decide everything by merely staying online. A shortcoming of this system is that it is more political than a financial system, which means that the economic system remains the same: capitalism! Another significant issue is that it is amenable to hackers!
To put everything together, it is evident that
capitalism, as a system, is abundant with disadvantages as it benefits the rich
rather than society. Social democracy has many benefits, including free access
to health and education facilities. E-democracy also has many benefits, but it
lacks a financial system that will be combined with direct democracy. An optimal political
system could combine the 'Scandinavian type' of socialism and a modern type
of direct e-democracy.
Unbridled
capitalism is self-destructive!
Capitalism is a
political and economic system that characterizes the contemporary world.
However, during the last decades, capitalism has turned wild, and today is
uncontrolled, without any rules. The protectionism the US president has shown
recently complicated things further. Capitalism is to the benefit of the
private financial Trusts, not of the governments. Recently, it is not even to
the advantage of the private sector, as international production has moved to
China and India!
Today most Western
states borrow money to cover their needs and consider this as usual instead of
focusing on production. However, in most countries, production means are
exploited by the private sector, and the only thing left to the government is
to provide services! Even critical governmental sections such as
communications, transportation, and energy are private, depriving substantial
revenue of the governments overloaded with loans to pay their expenses.
Unbelievably,
governments' credit rating worldwide is assessed by three international credit
rating agencies, Moody's, Standard& Poor’s (S&P), and Fitch, which are
all American! The World Trade Organization (WTO) also plays a significant role
in the global economy. At the same time, the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
controls the economy of the developing countries that ask for financial aid.
This aid is offered as austerity measures combined with loans accumulated to
the preexisting loans creating a vicious circle of a death spiral! The
austerity measures have proved counterproductive when they fulfill the needs of
the creditors and not of the bankrupt country in which investments should be
sought! It should be mentioned that the IMF is headquartered in the US, while
the headquarters of the WTO is in Geneva, Switzerland.
In most Western
countries, many industries have moved to developing countries,
such as the Balkans, China, India, and Africa, where taxation is low, and labor
is cheap. Today India and China have boosted their production. Most goods are
imported from these or other developing countries worldwide. For instance, fish
are imported from Tunisia, potatoes from Egypt, nuts from Iran, dairy products
from Bulgaria, etc.
Disappointingly, most
Western countries produce almost nothing else but services. In the US,
production has also decreased compared to agricultural products, such as
cornfields and car factories, which blossomed in the middle of the last century.
On the other hand, the Chinese economy is flourishing. Ironically, in China,
the most capitalistic country worldwide, the economic system is supposed to be
socialism (Maoism).
The discrepancy in
global production recently forced the US to start a global trade war! It is
unbelievable, but the US lately acts with protectionism like a socialist
country! Therefore, in 2018, the US imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum from
China, Mexico, and Canada. The US administration also imposed duties on various
goods imported from China. These tariffs were a strategy of national
protectionism from the side of the US. However, protectionism is a
characteristic of socialism!
The US moved to these
sanctions because of the high national debt of the American economy, with China
being the primary creditor. That means that financial instability forces the US
to make unpopular, even desperate, moves, including wars, usually with the
excuse of ''war on terror,'' that reflect the need for the US to control the
resources, especially oil and gas, and impede the Russian, Chinese
and Iranian influence.
In the last third of
the 20th century, the USA disconnected the banks' reserves with gold as a
value. That means that paper money has no value as it is unrelated to a
precious metal value. They are just papers! Today, although this increases
inflation, it is said that central banks such as the Fed central bank in the US
(and perhaps the ECB in Europe) print money to cover the governments' needs!
Today money instead of a banknote may be a simple click on a computer with
which an investor can transfer vast amounts!
Many say that money makes the world go round. Oil does! Contemporary society is highly dependent on oil as a form of energy. Prices of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) are mandatorily measured in dollars and manipulated by the US. In the last decades, the US has sought to control oil reserves. That need led to the Gulf War against Iraq, an oil-producing country, in 1991 and its occupation in 2003 with the excuse of nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that were never found! It also led to the attack in Afghanistan in 2001 (this country has additional ''reserves'' of opium) with the excuse of the ''War on terror'' after the 9/11 event in NYC. In 2014, during the civil war in Ukraine, Russia annexed Crimea, unwilling to lose its exit to the Black Sea.
This move led the US to impose suction on Russia, also asking for an embargo from the European Union (EU) that was highly dependent on Russian natural gas. The US also forced the Saudis to increase oil production, intending to harm the Russian economy. However, the only thing they achieved was to reduce Saudi's reserves to a trickle. It is said that Saudi oil will soon run out! The need to control the passage of oil and natural gas pipelines was the cause of the Syrian civil war in 2011. However, the interference of Russia in 2017 that aided Syria against terrorism complicated things.
Recently, tension has
moved to Iran, forcing the European Union to embargo Iran, despite its cheap
oil. Moreover, tension remains between Azerbaijan and Armenia, where Nagorno
Karabakh is still a contentious region (such as the Syrian Gollan height that Israel
occupies), and between the US and Qatar (although they were previously allies).
Everything is related to the control of oil and natural gas resources. The
decision of the US to transfer its embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing it de
facto and de jure as Israel's capital, aggravated tension with the Arabic
nations. However the Arabic countries are not at peace as they are divided into
Shia and Sunni Muslims, whose relationship is often hostile.
All the above
shows that contemporary conflicts are caused by the need of the US and Russia
to retain and expand their spheres of influence and control energy resources.
Oil and natural gas are still the leading cause of wars. Unless powerful
countries such as the US and Russia tend to other, greener, and more renewable
forms of energy, conflicts are expected to continue!
Marketing and politics
Nowadays, politics is
marketing. Politicians become popular with the aid of image-makers.
Additionally, most leaders flatter their nation as populism has prevailed. On
the contrary, in the past, politicians aimed to improve things rather than
using politics as a lucrative job. Unfortunately, people often trust and elect
incompetent and sometimes immoral politicians. For example, the president of
the Philippines uses armed forces to execute drug dealers on the scene without
arresting them. Contemporary citizens are more prone to manipulation as they do
not have a broad education but are overspecialized. Consequently, they are
easily manipulated by marketing that creates an ideal image for a politician,
especially a presidential candidate.
International financial Trusts and
speculators rule the world!
International
financial Trusts and speculators manipulate the world's economy. For example,
in 1991, investor George Soros in the so-called Black Wednesday speculation
movement, brought the British economy to the verge of bankruptcy! Soros gained
money again in 2016 investing in Brexit, i.e., the exit of the UK from the
European Union (EU). Specifically, shortly before the Brexit referendum, Soros
bought shares from the German Deutsche Bank that next bet on Brexit. Then he
sold them again to the German bank. After Brexit, he won about one hundred million euros from this, about 107 million dollars.
Another example that
shows that financial Trusts rule the world is the current French president, who
was previously an employee and later an investment banker at the Rothschild
& Cie Banque! The Rothschild and Rockefeller Trusts dominate the global
financial market!
People stupidly believe that capitalism is a system for the benefit of the whole. But capitalism is only for the rich and the multinational companies. In this system, poor people become more miserable, and rich people become more affluent, while the financial gap between these two groups is increasing! In most Western countries, at least one-third of the citizens are under the limit of poverty, and unemployment rates and the percentage of homeless people gradually increase. Also, the public provisions of services, such as free access to higher education and healthcare services, tend to be privatized, as in the US.
Today everything has
been commercialized. Mass media, TV, the internet, and cinema have been
commercialized. The ‘star system’ using ads and commercials brainwashes people,
especially the young, about what is ‘cool’ and ‘trendy’ to watch and buy. Even
the internet is commercialized by companies such as Microsoft that monopolize
information technology. Even YouTube is commercialized.
The unacceptable contemporary working conditions
Unemployment rates
today are high, and working hours are flexible with a continuous assessment that
encourages rivalry. Moreover, there is a tendency to fire employees easily,
while wages often are low or unsatisfactory, and employees sometimes work
without a contract and insurance. A common trend for companies is to use
interns as cheap personnel while undermining trade unions and reducing their
power is also a common feature.
Many people today
have an impressive résumé, including postgraduate studies, but most find a job
outside their field! Others have a career in which working conditions are
unpleasant. For instance, they may work overtime without being paid for their
extra work, work without breaks, or work flexible hours (sometimes work a few
hours weekly while other times work excessively); their workload may be
unbearable, and they may be underpaid.
In our days and
times, overspecializing is a particular trend as people choose to study
something to make easy money instead of fulfilling their dreams. Surprisingly,
most people today have postgraduate studies that, in the past, were supposed to
fill the resume of a person seeking an academic career! However, today they
intend to increase the chance of finding a job. On the other hand, labor jobs
are less popular as most people choose to study at college or university rather
than selecting a technical labor job. Consequently, migrants came to fill the
gap of cheap labor, although they are often exploited by working for low wages
in unacceptable conditions. Migrants were also an easy solution for the
decreasing young population of Europe, a continent with a prevalent aging
population where people of working age are fewer than in the past.
Undoubtedly, current
working conditions encourage competitiveness. People learn from their infancy
to be competitive and prevail. For example, a vacancy may attract
many applications, increasing competition. The lucky ones who
are overqualified and overspecialized take the job. The rest will
compromise on doing a job unrelated to their studies and skills or gain
an unemployment benefit. However, the most prudent approach from the government should be to find a job for the unemployed and not to let them get used to
benefits.
Regarding working
conditions, a significant issue is working flexible hours. Contrary to the past, today,
employees may work a few hours weekly or alternate periods of working
excessively with periods of a few hours of weekly work. Statistics referring to
unemployment are usually unreliable. If someone works even one hour weekly,
they are not considered unemployed but as working a part-time job! Unemployment
rates increase gradually, and many people strive to find a job. Wages have
decreased dramatically in Southeast Europe because of the implemented austerity
measures or because their economies were destroyed by communism (referring to
the former Eastern Bloc).
Regarding labor
rights, lately, things have deteriorated further, and on July 18, 2018, in
Austria, the parliament decided to make 12-hour work legal, despite the
protests! These changes are expected to be adopted by other Western countries
very soon. That means working conditions returned to the Middle Ages, and the
bloody protests, including the Haymarket massacre in Chicago on May 4, 1886,
were in vain!
Do
we still have slaves?
Yes, we do, but more subtly! Primarily, black people were treated as slaves in the USA until 1865 and gained
their rights in 1964! Nowadays, a subtle form of slavery is evident. For
instance, laborers in rich Arabic countries are often treated like slaves.
Contrary to the affluence of these nations, many migrants (especially those
from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh) are exploited as cheap labor! The same
applies to many Western countries where migrants are often paid low wages
without insurance! Often, sailors and employees in ships, cargo, or passengers, including cruise ships, are migrants (such as from the Philippines, India,
Pakistan, and Bangladesh) who are exploited. For example, they are paid
less than sailors and employees of Western backgrounds.
Is
socialism the ideal political system?
What is Socialism?
There is confusion
about what socialism is and how we can define it. In this text, socialism is
referred to in its modern version as a system related to a parliamentary system
in which adult citizens vote in regular elections. Their representatives govern
the country with the institution of the Parliament, where the majority makes
decisions. Genuine socialism is a preliminary stage of communism. Communism
today, apart from North Korea, does not exist.
Socialism is the
first stage of communism that follows a period of a socialist era.
Socialism is a political as well as an economic system. The other three
prevalent financial systems in history are slavery, feudalism (characteristic
of medieval Europe and China), and capitalism. Slavery was typical of the
ancient world. However, black people were treated as enslaved people in the USA
until 1865 and gained their rights in 1964! Regarding feudalism, European
history, mainly Medieval, is characterized by continuing wars between
European feuds! Capitalism has prevailed since the Industrial Revolution and
Adam Smith’s economic theories.
Socialism is based on
the theories of the Russian philosopher Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) and the German
scientist Friedrich Engels (1820 – 1895). Marx wrote the famous books The
Communist Manifesto (1848) and Das Kapital (The Capital) (1867 - 1894). They
both established the theory of dialectical materialism. Contrary to common
beliefs, socialism started in France, not in Russia! It dates to the ''Paris
Commune,'' a radical socialist and revolutionary government that ruled Paris
from 28 March to 28 May 1871. Eventually, the national French Army suppressed the Commune. About 20,000 Communards were killed in battle or executed!
Contemporary socialism has been successful in Scandinavia, while social democracy has been thriving in Germany. Switzerland, Canada, and Australia are also countries where aspects of socialism have been successful for the population. However, the political system in both remained a representative democracy in a parliamentary system based on popular sovereignty, while the economic system remained capitalism!
So, contemporary socialism, in political
and economic terms, is a chimerical form of socialism and capitalism as a
financial system and politically works on the parliamentary system of
representative democracy, meaning that it is unrelated to communism. However,
it has kept some features of communism!
Modern socialism may
have the meaning of social democracy (such as in Germany) or the Scandinavian
type of socialism, which retains many characteristics of socialism as a
preliminary stage of communism, including free access to education and a
healthcare system for all, private insurance and pension, benefits for
sensitive social groups (including the unemployed), etc.
Another type of
socialism includes the ‘far-left type of socialism,’ characteristic in Latin
America where people starve as it is counterproductive. It seems that in Latin
America, other ''values'' such as football and dancing (such as samba) are in
higher priority than the values of real socialism! Most Latinos seek or wish to
find a better life in the US to live the ''American dream!'' That means that
the ''Latin type'' of socialism has failed as the citizens of most countries in
South America live in poverty and corruption, and if they had the chance, they
would all massively migrate to the US and Canada! Criminality rates in Latin America are very high, and the population lives in a condition of insecurity.
The ''Latin type'' of
socialism is based on populism, bureaucracy, and protectionism, and it is not a
system worthy of referring to. For instance, although Argentina accused the US
and international speculators of its bankruptcy, it once again requested the
aid of the IMF (International Monetary Fund)! Venezuela is another country
where the Latin type of socialism has transformed into a communist
dictatorship. Cuba, the socialist system, a dictatorship of
Fidel Castro, has also failed to fulfill the expectations of socialists. This developing country has recently tried to reconcile
with the US.
Contrary, the
'Scandinavian type' of socialism, as well as the Switzerland, Canadian, and Australian
socialism aspects (regarding their healthcare system and social services), are beneficial to the
population. These systems have been successful in the
above countries. People there have free healthcare and education access. Social services ensure that
vulnerable citizens will not suffer but be under the nest of the state. The
education system has ambitious standards in all these countries, especially Finland.
The only disadvantage of the above socialist countries is that they are based on remarkably high taxes to offer all these social benefits to their citizens. Also, pensions are typically low, at least in Australia. Another feature that these systems lack is free accommodation for all, something that communism took into consideration. However, inhabitants of apartments in labor blocks lived in small depressive rooms deprived of amenities.
Accommodation in Western countries is expensive. Housing is a significant problem in most Western countries where most people do not own a house but are tenants of an apartment as the available accommodation is inadequate to cover the overpopulated cities. Others pay their mortgage for a lifetime, while most students live with roommates as they can afford to rent an apartment alone because of the high tuition fees. In socialism, access to higher education, as mentioned, is free. However, that does not mean that private education does not exist. Similarly, in modern socialism, private healthcare and insurance are options, in addition to private ones.
The advantages of social democracy
According to the original socialism as a preliminary stage of communism, the means of production should belong to the government and be public! In communism, the private sector does not exist! On the contrary, today, in most Western countries, almost everything is private. At the same time, the governments are overloaded with loans to cover their needs, mainly wages, pensions, infrastructure, and social benefits, instead of focusing on increasing production! But even if they wished, they could not, as the production means have moved to the private sector! So, today the states produce nothing else but service! Since the production means are private, this has deprived the governments of significant revenue. It is outrageous that governmental indebtedness with loads of loans from the free market added to the public budget is considered ordinary!
Loan overload ends up
in a vicious circle, and a ''death spiral'' because the governments do not own
the production means. As a result, they need more money to pay their loans to
private debts. So, the governments loan more money to pay the old debts until the
national debt is unsustainable! Then the usual story is to ask for help from
the IMF (International Monetary Fund) that will ''aid'' with unbearable
counterproductive austerity measures and offer new loans added to the
pre-existing ones!
On the other hand, in
communism, the government owns the production means, so it does not need to
borrow money to cover its needs. In socialism, the concept is different.
Critical governmental sections, such as communications, transportation, energy
resources, and infrastructure, must be kept public and not belong entirely to the
private sector. However, in most Western countries, they are private!
Therefore, the quality of service they offer, and their standards continuously
decline, as the only target of the private sector is profit, even by lowering
standards! Examples include low-cost airlines and private railways, followed by
increased accident rates because of focusing on profit at the expense of high
safety standards. Another example is private energy and communications, which have become more expensive for the public.
On the other side of
the spectrum, in socialism, the state exploits the energy resources to earn
money to feed its budget. However, today most Western countries, except
Germany, which manipulates the Eurozone for its benefit, offer only services
instead of investing in primary production. Unfortunately, most Western
industries and factories have moved to countries with low taxes and cheap working hands, such as the Balkans, China, India, and Africa. So, it
is ridiculous to speak about capitalism when today almost everything is
produced in China and other developing countries while Western countries offer
only services. It is also absurd to claim that China's financial system is
socialism (or Maoism), as China is the hub of capitalism! The only
characteristics of communism that China retains are oligarchy and corruption!
As mentioned, according to socialism, the state should exploit energy resources, including natural gas and oil. In most Western countries, unfortunately, private companies utilize energy sources. It is a matter of different points of view, as in socialism, the government must exploit natural resources and develop products with industries, factories, plants, power stations, etc. It is a way of earning money to feed the public budget instead of overloading with loans from the free market as all Western countries today stupidly do.
In addition to
energy, agriculture, livestock raising, and fishery are essential to the nation
as it does not need to be based on imports. It may even export goods when the
local market is covered. A country's positive current account means a positive
financial index. The state is a ''net lender'' (and not a ''net borrower'')
from the rest of the world, and its economy is competitive.
The key to the financial growth of a government is production. Today, most Western
countries are based on imports, not exports. For example, most non-edible goods
are imported from China, and most consumable products are imported from
developing countries with low quality and safety standards, such as fish
abundant in heavy metals from the Mediterranean, nuts filled with aflatoxins
from the Middle East, and fruits and vegetables, and grains rich in pesticides
and organophosphates.
In the West, many consumable goods are imported; for instance, fish comes
from Tunisia, potatoes from Egypt, onions from China, dairy products from the
Balkans, and grain from Ukraine! So, for most Western countries, exports are
negligible! An exemption may be Germany, but many argue that Deutsche Bank is
on the verge of collapse because of high exposure to toxic bonds and other
high-risk investments.
Additionally, government-funded research, innovative entrepreneurship, and high technology are fundamental to increasing production. Research today tends to go to the private sector, such as biotechnology companies in medicine.
Socialism cares for
the entire population, especially vulnerable groups and minorities. On the
contrary, right-wing parties only care for the wealthy. Weirdly, their
low-class voters are unaware of this feature! Moreover, right-wing parties use
the slogan ‘nation, religion and family.’ Dictatorships that belong
to the far-right spectrum use the same motto!
In socialism, all
levels of education are free of charge for everyone. On the contrary, higher education is private in many Western countries, especially the US. Thus, students take loans to afford to pay their tuition fees.
Consequently, in many Western countries, the education system at its highest
level involves only the economic elite.
In socialism, access
to healthcare services is also free for everyone, even those without
healthcare insurance. In the US, the state covers Medicare
for uninsured patients. Still, the Trump administration revoked Obamacare, which cared for people previously ''dumped'' from the healthcare facilities! In
capitalism, the healthcare system in many countries is primarily private and often
manipulated by private insurance companies that, as if they were doctors,
decide which medical tests and procedures will pay for and which will not be covered!
In socialism, the
state has all the critical social services for the public, such as special schools
for children with disabilities, social services, community clinics, and health
services, etc. Socialism also offers benefits such as free access to sports
facilities, vacation vouchers, vouchers for renting a house for the lower
class, refugee facilities, etc. Other advantages of socialism include benefits
for sensitive social groups, including unemployed people, families with many
children or with a single parent, vulnerable people with medical or mental
problems, etc.
The difference between socialism and communism
Socialism is the first stage of communism that follows the period of the socialist era after a
period of adjustment. So, theoretically, and contrary
to widespread belief, communism was never applied as a system! In all countries
that started with socialism, they remained with this until their dissolution! Communism
shares all the characteristics of socialism described above. However, there are
some crucial differences. Communism is a specific economic system that has nothing
to do with the current system of representative democracy in a parliamentary
system based on popular sovereignty. In simple words, communism has nothing to
do with democracy!
In communism, all the
means of production belong to the state. The private sector does not exist! The
state exploits natural sources, such as oil and natural gas. Also, the state
has its industries and factories and produces everything, so it does not need
to import goods. On the contrary, the state can even export products. In real life,
things did not work so well regarding this matter, as the only thing that some
communist countries exported was automobiles, such as Dacia in Romania and Lada
Niva in Russia.
Moreover, in some
cases, such as in Cuba, the only thing that could be exploited was sugar cane and
tourism, with the dollar prevailing as a currency in Cuba! Consequently,
production could not cover their essential needs (although the opponents of
this view attribute this to the US embargo that devastated Cuba). Furthermore,
the fact that the private sector did not exist means there was no
competitiveness and innovation to boost the economy. People had to compromise
with public goods, not having the chance to compare their quality and
prices with private products that did not exist!
Another feature of
communism is that all citizens are public servants. There is
no unemployment! This benefit makes the system seem ideal, but it is a utopia
as, in real life, all but the Communist party members lived in poverty!
The main feature of
communism is that the production means belongs to the state. Using them as
revenue, the government can pay wages and pensions. In communism, everyone has
free access to education and healthcare facilities. Contrary to the
contemporary privatization of higher education, in communism, access to all
levels of education, including higher, is free. At the same time, scientific research is
encouraged for the common good, not for the benefit of private companies as
today. The state also establishes preventive medicine campaigns, as ‘prevention
is better than cure,' as Hippocrates, the ancient Greek father of medicine,
quoted. This motto is neglected today, and people suffer and die from
preventable maladies.
Additionally, access
to sports facilities is free for everyone and encouraged, contrary to
the contemporary commercialized sport that focuses on championship rather than
competitiveness. Today's young generation focuses on studies and building their
CV at the expense of exercise. However, championships and metal collections were
characteristic in real life, even during the Soviet era, and some Soviet athletes were
found doped.
In communism, the
regime ensures adequate free accommodation for everyone in public blocks.
Consequently, homeless people do not exist! The
state also provides the feeding of the population, and there are vouchers for
the poor to have the essentials such as four and sugar, staple foods of the poor. But people in communism were undernourished and lived in depressive apartments where electricity and gas were
unavailable 24/7.
Other benefits of communism include good working conditions with eight hours daily and 48 hours weekly, rights that have been replaced today by ''flexible hours.' Workers also had annual leave, bank holidays, and time and days off. In summer, free access to holiday resorts was available for the lower class. On the contrary, today, vacations are only for those who can afford them. But still, in many countries, vacation vouchers do exist.
Has
the ‘Latin type of socialism’ failed?
Latin type of socialism, meaning socialism in Latin America, has failed, and the best examples are Argentina, Cuba, and Venezuela. Some attribute this to the persistent interference of the US during the second half of the 20th century to control the governments of Latin America at any cost, even by supporting coups!
However, in Latin America, despite the Banana democracies, the system was misapplied from the very beginning. In Argentina,
the bankruptcy in 2005 did not teach any lesson to the next government that
should focus on implementing all the necessary reforms. Consequently, it reapplied to the IMF for new loans and austerity measures.
In Venezuela, the
populist communist dictator Nicolas Maduro brought his country to extreme
poverty. Maduro turned an oil-producing country into a developing country with
a destroyed economy with colossal inflation. Maduro succeeded the populist
leader Hugo Chavez who died from cancer. Maduro remained in power with rigged elections. He managed to subdue protests by using squads of armed thugs on motorbikes (something like paramilitary troops)
who shot many protesters. Looting became quite common, while many citizens of
Venezuela visited the Colombia borders to find something to eat. Criminality rates are high in Latin America, where the population lives in insecurity.
Cuba's socialism has also failed. Two years before
Fidel Castro's death in Cuba in 2016, his brother and President Raul decided to
reconcile with the US as the prolonged US embargo brought Cuba to its knees. This
reconciliation was followed by reforms, including national elections in which
Miguel Díaz-Canel succeeded Raul Castro. Eventually, Cuba and the US
reestablished their diplomatic relations. But Cuba still has a long way to compromise with the West.
The last communist regime
The regime in North
Korea is a dictatorship in which opponents are executed or imprisoned, people
starve (some years ago, there was a famine), and the dictator controls
everything. North Korea is the last communist regime worldwide. The North
Korean leader, Kim Jong-Un, has threatened the West by launching ballistic
missiles. China is behind every move of North Korea.
The disadvantages of communism
There is no example
of a country in which communism succeeded. In 4 words, communism is
characterized by corruption, bureaucracy, propaganda, and patriotic sentiment,
sometimes reaching jingoism or chauvinism.
Corruption was common
as public servants were prone to bribing. Bribery and fraud by civic
dignitaries and civil servants of the regime were common. For example, during Tito's communism, it is said that the police of Yugoslavia were bribed to let travelers cross the border.
Bureaucracy in
communism was also typical. It was a monster like a Hydra (a mythological minute
freshwater coelenterate with a stalk-like tubular body and a ring of tentacles
around the mouth; Hercules killed it) and was the main reason the system was
counterproductive.
The regime used
propaganda to manipulate and brainwash the people. The mass media were public
and controlled by the government, using them for propaganda. Although many
people haven’t considered this issue, patriotic sentiment, often reaching the
form of jingoism or even chauvinism, was characteristic of communist regimes and was used
even in schools where students learned a biased history of their nation, such as in North Macedonia, where students were taught, they were of Alexander the Great decent, although Slavs! It was Tito's policy to raise their patriotic sediment.
All former
communist states adopted patriotism and ethnocentrism. It is not a coincidence
that even today, that is characteristic in all countries of the former Eastern
Bloc. In many former communist countries, this is still evident. For instance, in the Autumn
of 2015, in Hungary, the government raised a razor-wire fence to block
the entry of refugees into the country, and paramilitary groups patrolled the borders.
In all the former
communist countries and North Korea today (the only communist regime that has
remained), the leader turned to a dictator, e.g., Stalin in Russia, Ceausescu
in Romania, etc. The regime of communism was authoritarian, and the only people
who enjoyed the benefits were mostly the members of the communist party. The
communist governments closed their borders, and people could not travel abroad.
There was cooperation between the regimes and Russia as the USSR controlled all the
systems in the communist Eastern bloc, often by using excessive force. During
the ‘Prague Spring’ in 1968, Czechoslovakia, led by Alexander Dubcek,
tried to get away from the despotism of Russia. Then Russia invaded
Czechoslovakia with 2,000 tanks and military forces of 200,000 troops. During
the invasion, 72 citizens were killed.
The regimes had a
comprehensive surveillance system by security agents (such as the KGB in Russia
and Stasi in East Germany) and commissars. The regime's opponents were exiled to gulags (e.g., to Siberia), executed, or sent to mental hospitals. The official
religion was atheism, and the rest religions and doctrines, especially
Christianity, were persecuted.
Communism as a
financial system was counterproductive, as the
workers who worked hard and the lazy were paid the same wage! Also, qualified, and skilled people (with a university and postgraduate degrees) were paid
the same as uneducated people who have completed only the mandatory
education years. There weren’t any productivity bonuses,
and the employees were paid the same, regardless of their productivity and
education level!
The trade unions that belonged to the Communist political party controlled everything and not only acted as spies and snitches searching for opponents of the regime. They also did not have in mind the common good but tried to fulfill the interests of the Communist party members. Although the working conditions were human, people did not have the right to work overtime or a second job to increase their income.
Moreover, the
communist system suggests natural
resources, including natural gas, oil, coal, and metals, will be exploited only by the state. However many countries have
a shortage of natural resources. For example, Cuba (today seeking to be under the
West’s influence!) had only sugar and was entirely dependent on Russian
financial aid. Namely, Cuba has no production. The USA’s
embargo was just an excuse; if communism worked, Cuban citizens wouldn’t try to
escape to America with small boats, as many did (and the USA was happy to welcome
them).
A significant drawback of communism is the lack of competition with the private sector. The private sector did not exist, which was absurd as people had no right to work privately. Everything was public, and investors did not exist. There wasn’t any competition from the private sector to decrease the goods’ costs, as everything was public. The lack of private investors was a drawback to the economy's growth.
Moreover, public services were ill-organized and lacked the funds to work efficiently, as the regime did not offer enough money. However, much public
money was squandered. Fraud and bribing were common as corruption was extended. The time
that the public services were deprived of money, the members of the communist party and the leader enjoyed a luxurious life, e.g., the Romanian dictator
Ceausescu lived in a vast, elegant palace with bathrooms with gold taps and
curtains embroidered in gold and silver, the time that the Romanian starved!
There is no example of a communist state that succeeded and worked. The freedom to express an opinion different from the regime's acceptance did not exist. In all communist regimes, the population starved, people were not allowed to move to another country, and political opponents were prosecuted and even executed or confined to mental clinics and gulags. Governmental commissars and spies surveyed everyone and everything.
Economically speaking, in communism, the citizens' prosperity and the government's financial growth were hampered as productivity was deficient, and exports were negligible. Communism failed as there wasn’t any competition from the private sector, neither did investors exist, as the state owned everything. The absence of private sectors precluded healthy and constructive competition. The workers and employees were paid almost the same, regardless of their educational level and productivity. Of course, the wages were unsatisfactory. Bonuses and other means of increasing productivity did not exist. People lived in small cold labor apartments in large labor blocks.
What is direct democracy? Is it the ideal
political system?
Today, we cannot speak about direct democracy, as the current system in Western countries is a representative democracy based on a parliamentary system of popular sovereignty. In a parliamentary system, citizens elect their representatives to govern the country. However, in most Western countries, abstention from the national elections tends to be high, e.g., 30 to 40 percent, so the representatives are not elected by the entire population of adult citizens but by a minority!
Modern Western ‘democracy’ has nothing to do with the direct democracy of Ancient Athens in the golden age of Pericles (fifth century BC). Today the parliamentary system is often manipulated by financial Trusts, is often corrupted, and uses the media for brainwashing.
On the other hand, direct democracy is a system that was invented in ancient Athens by Cleisthenes. It is a form of democracy in which people decide policy initiatives directly. Direct democracy differs from most modern Western-style democracies, which are indirect democracies. Direct democracy is like but distinct from representative democracy, in which people vote for representatives who then elect policy initiatives.
The Athenian democracy of the 5th century
BC
The earliest direct democracy was applied in the Athenian democracy of the ‘Golden Age’ of Pericles (5th century BC) when Athens became the hub of art and literature. At the same time, it expanded its spheres of influence. It was something like the US today! Direct democracy also occurred in Thurii, a colony of Athens in Italy.
After the fall of tyranny, in about 508–507 B.C., the Athenian politician Cleisthenes proposed a complete reform of the system of government. He classified the population into ten tribes and organized the army. He also introduced the principle of equality of rights for all, called ‘isonomia’ (= the equality of people before the law), later expanded by the Athenian general Pericles.
The Athenians used a lot to select officials to ensure all citizens were equally qualified for office. To avoid any corruption, allotment machines were used. In most positions chosen by a lot, Athenian citizens could only be selected once. This office rotation meant no one could build a power base by staying in a particular position. The only officials chosen by elections, one from each tribe, were the ‘strategoi,’ i.e., generals, who had leading military skills, and the ‘treasurers’ (persons appointed to administer or manage the financial assets and liabilities), something like bankers and ministers of the economy. The latter should be wealthy as any funds they had embezzled were subtracted from their private property!
Interestingly, the leading bodies in the Athenian democracy were:
- The
‘assembly’ (‘Ecclesia,’ the word means a church with the same meaning of gathering) comprises male citizens.
- The
‘Boule’ (something like a ''parliament'') comprises five hundred citizens.
- The law courts.
In essence, the Athenian democracy was direct as the adult male citizens made the decisions through the assembly (‘Ecclesia’), the 'Boule'' and the law courts. These controlled the entire political process. The Athenians enjoyed their liberties by living in a city that was not subject to another power.
In the assembly (Ecclesia), the debate was open to all male citizens with the right to participate, sometimes with a quorum of 6,000 people. The majority took the decisions. The decisions made in Ecclesia were conducted by the Boule of 500, which had already approved the bill for Ecclesia. The Boule was elected by lot yearly, while every citizen could serve up to twice.
Law courts were composed of many jurors, with no judges but citizens. A lot selected the jurors daily from a seasonal pool, also chosen by lot. In ancient Athens, there were only about 30,000 male citizens. Each year several thousands of them were politically active. Participation by the selected citizens was mandatory, and they were given financial compensation for their duties. The courts had unlimited power to control the other government bodies and political leaders.
Athenian democracy was not an inclusive democracy, as women, foreigners (called ‘metoiki’), and enslaved people were excluded from it. Moreover, in the fifth century B.C., Athens was a city of 350,000 people that could be easily organized into ten tribes. It was a city-state and not a country. Consequently, with such a small population of a ''city-state,'' direct democracy could be efficiently organized and work effectively. But direct democracy would be difficult in the form of an entire country rather than a city-state like ancient Athens.
Many people criticize the ancient Athenian democracy of the fifth century BC as an economic system based on slavery. At the same time, women, enslaved people, and foreigners did not participate in the decisions. However, it should be quoted that women (confined at home as housewives) and enslaved people were not educated to participate in public decisions and events, even in the theaters. At the same time, the foreigners were apt to leave whenever they wished without being obligated to be aware of the city's issues. Even today, immigrants without holding citizenship have no right to vote.
In ancient Greece, there was a differentiation between education and ''paideia.'' In English, these two words are used interchangeably! But ''paideia.'' is something more than schools. It is culture. In ancient Athens, the system gave extreme importance for the citizens to have an elevated level of education through private lessons and interacting with philosophers and sophists at the agora (= a public open space used for assemblies and markets). Sophists were paid teachers of philosophy and rhetoric and the first lawyers in the world. Focusing on education ensured that decisions in direct democracy were taken with wisdom and prudence rather than prejudice and being subject to manipulation. Contrary, today, most people are overeducated and overspecialized, with heaps of degrees filling their endless resumes, but they lack a broad educational level. Many even lack common sense!
Unfortunately, like ancient Rome, Athens eventually became a fascistic city-state and the first form of imperialism. Ancient Athens dominated its allies, stole the shared bank, established military garrisons in all the cities of its allies, especially the islands, and forced them to be governed by a pro-Athenian ‘democratic’ regime. The allies who resisted, such as the citizens of the Greek island Milos, were slaughtered mercilessly. Athens also participated in the Peloponnesian War, a civil war in ancient Greece, and was in constant war with several Greek city-states, including Sparta (that, contrary to the heroic figures of the ''300'' movie, on several occasions, it co-operated with the Persians, the principal enemy of ancient Greece, against the Athenians).
Is direct democracy applicable today
utilizing e-democracy, e-voting, and e-government?
You may read the relevant article E-Democracy, E-Governance and PublicNet-Work
Today, features of direct democracy, as it was applied in ancient Athens in the 5th century BC, could adjust and modify modern governments. Many countries use referendums as a means of direct democracy. These are common in countries such as Switzerland and other European countries. However, referendums are not a panacea. Often referendums in European Union (EU) member countries have led to wrong decisions, although they are supposed to be a way of direct democracy. For example, referendums in Europe, including the one in France in 2005, impeded the plan for a common European constitution. Another example is the referendum in the UK that imprudently decided to abandon the European Union ('Brexit''), a fateful decision that will doom its economy.
E-democracy, also called ‘internet democracy,’ is the use of information and communications technologies and strategies by ‘democratic sectors’ such as governments, political parties, and civil society organizations, within the political processes of local communities, states/ regions, nations, and on the global stage. Governments provide full access to information and interact electronically with their citizens. Remarkably, political parties can campaign online, while the media and the internet provide helpful information. The private sector represents commercially driven connectivity, software, and technology. E-citizens in e-democracy are politically active citizens who participate directly in governance using the Internet, smartphone communications, and other technologies.
E-voting is an abbreviation of electronic voting, i.e., voting using electronic means. E-voting may comprise various internet services, from data transmission to online voting through standard connectable household devices (desktops, laptops, notebooks, tablets, and smartphones). Automation may vary from simple tasks to a complete solution that includes voter registration and authentication, vote input, local or precinct tallying, vote data encryption and transmission to servers, vote aggregation and consolidation, and election administration. The E-voting system needs a set of standards established by regulatory bodies. These standards are associated with security, privacy, confidentiality, accuracy, integrity, swiftness, audit, accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability, and ecological sustainability.
E-government, abbreviated as ‘e-gov,’ describes the e-democracy activities of government institutions. E-gov is the employment of the Internet and the worldwide web for delivering government information and services to citizens. It utilizes information technology (IT), information and communication technologies (ICTs), and other web-based telecommunication technologies to improve and enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery in the public sector. E-gov promotes and improves broad stakeholders’ contribution to national and community development. Additionally, it integrates the governance process.
Undoubtedly, increased levels of trust are needed in e-democracy and e – gov. Online consultation is used within administrative policy-making processes. In the UK, many online consultations have been deployed to gather certain citizen input via the web. ''Accountability,'' ''Trust,'' the ''Public Will,'' as well as ''transparency'' are important to the e-democracy agenda. E-government is regarded as an anti-corruption tool. It focuses on people's will in many small and large ways online. The public network represents the strategic use of ICTs for implementing publicly established policy goals and programs through direct and diverse stakeholder involvement online. The public network is a selective public approach that uses two-way online information exchange to determine government policy.
Eventually, which is the best political system?
Poverty, oppression, violation of human rights, and a counterproductive economic policy were the main stems of communism that failed wherever it existed as a system. Consequently, insisting on a failed, inefficient system is in vain.
From my perspective, the best system combines socialism with direct democracy. Socialism has been successful in countries such as the Scandinavian countries, while socialism aspects worked efficiently in Australia, Canada, and Switzerland. It increases citizens' quality of life (QoL), who enjoy free education, healthcare, and social services. In contemporary socialism, the state participates as a shareholder in strategic governmental sections such as communications, transportation, energy, and water, which are not exclusively private.
Moreover, the state moves to public investment while encouraging private investment to establish productive competition between the private and public sectors. Furthermore, the employees' productivity can increase with bonuses that promote competition. Socialism must focus on a high-level education system, such as in Finland. People with a high education level will make wise and prudent decisions, essential in a democracy.
Direct democracy is not a utopia. It is feasible today, but not in the same way as in ancient Athens of Pericles of the 5th century B.C. Then Athens was a small city where this system was easy to work. Today ''modern direct democracy'' may use technology and work effectively not only with referendums (that may often decide wrongly) but also via the web as an electronic democracy (e-democracy), electronic government (e-gov), electronic voting (e-voting), and consultation online. A high education level is also important in a direct democracy.
Epilogue
An optimal political system could combine the Scandinavian type of socialism and a modern type of direct e-democracy. But an ideal political system is utopian, as humans will eventually degenerate it!
Thanks for reading!