Redneck Review
No. 47  3/14/2016
The ongoing primary and caucus season suggests another closer look should be taken at the opposing theories of socialism and capitalism. Bernie Sander's win in Michigan gives ample evidence that the long disproved threory of socialism is still alive and well in our country, despite its miserable past record of bankruptcy and poverty.
But first, lets make a distinction between capitalism as it was defined in last week's article, and which was responsible for the unprecedented growth that propelled the USA to the world's most powerful and prosperous nation in the 250 years since its birth.
Built on the solid rock of private property ownership, early capitalism used the lure of profits to spur creative individuals to analyze the needs of fellow Americans, then to come up with answers to those needs in the least expensive and efficient way. This scenario resulted in the most competitive producers generating an income usually far above the average person, but only if their efforts were recognized by consumers who were willing purchasers, who were happy with the products, and willing to pay for them.
Thus one can truthfully say that the individual who best meets the needs of his peers, in the most competitive way, becomes the wealthiest and most valuable man in the area!
This contrasts of course with the currently criticized "capitalism" which is characterized by a "frenzied intemperance," the term used by Robert Horvat in his book RETURN TO ORDER. Mr. Horvat indicts the modern capitalist whose sole god is money and profit, and who achieves his end by faulty advertising, shoddy or illegal products (like drugs), by illegal competition, and by use of any other means that is unconcerned with the welfare of the customer, but only with the profit on the bottom line.
One can see obviously, that a solid moral concern for the welfare of a neighbor must be present in the first case, whereas, a "dog-eat-dog" mentality which lacks any concern for the customer, but seeks only the individual's material welfare dominates the other!
But what about socialism? The words "bankruptcy and poverty" at the end of the first paragraph are strong words, and may offend some, but a study of history testifies most powerfully that it is true. Every full blown socialist nation in the past, Hitlers's Nazism, Stalin's Communism, Castro's Cuba, North Korea, to name just a few, have gone down the socialist road only to end in total ruin and disaster. Internet users can key in that word, and spend hours studying the disaster associated with it down through the ages!
Common sense gives us the reason for the difference! In a legitimate capitalist state, every individual is given the right to own property, and the profit incentive to study the needs and wants of his heighbor, and then create a solution which better satisfies his wants at a lower price than any competitor. Consider the massive wealth accumulated by Bill Gates and others who have given the world the computer and the cell phone!
Contrast that to the socialist state where income equality is a major goal, and the road to that goal taxes heavily the producer and gives in turn to the individuals who are very content to sit back and let the government take care of them! Incentive to produce dies, the wealth being distributed dries up, and soon all find themselves in a poverty stricken state and ruled by a government that uses debt to achieve its ends! Sound familiar?? 
Jake Wren 

Home

Classified Ads