Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
Socialism as an ideal is based on a society-wide form of cooperation. From what we know of human behavior this is all but impossible. Socialists know this and that is why they accept a very large degree of state coercion to accomplish their means. Enforced cooperation isn't cooperation and the outcomes are never fair or egalitarian. In fact, if you look at social statistics, socialist countries often have much more difficulty dealing with even the most basic of economic and political problems.
As a political science student, who takes the discipline seriously, I have studied various schools of political behavior, particularly those influenced by the biological sciences. I can say that humans, on a biological level, require two things for sustained cooperation, kin relations or a reciprocal relationship. Obviously, the first one is based around family and is the basis for the Roman systems (notice how they were organized into families) and a lot of the older feudal economic systems. The second is a lot harder. Reciprocal economic relationships require a fair and free game that is often played without personal knowledge of the other person. Free markets are a good way of handling this as they deal with real human incentives based around self-interest. When people are free to make their own decisions, outcomes are often a lot more equal, as everyone gets a chance to produce at their own competitive advantage.
Problems often occur when governments get involved. This credit market thing is actually the result of government legislation under Carter and renewed under Clinton that forced creditors to give a certain % of bad mortgages to people who were unable to lend at normal rates. It isn't all the markets fault.
|
In more words....pretty much sums up what I think.
But I guess my view is 'simple.'
