General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Sorry, It's Not a 'Law of Capitalism' That You Pay Your Employees as Little as Possible. It's..." [View all]branford
(4,462 posts)You raise a fair question concerning whether market influences or technological improvements lifted people or capitalism. A real chicken or the egg came first dilemma. I would generally say neither, rather that the opening of markets, technological advancements and capitalism have been complementary. China and India are currently the perfect examples. Access to foreign markets, rapid industrialization and competition has served them well as it similarly did with America in the pre and post-WWII periods, and Britain in the 19th century . Most significantly, profits to be derived capitalism (particularly as they related to the military) have primarily driven technological achievement in the modern era.
You correctly observe that there has never been a successful "true" socialist country (or even a predominately socialist one) in the modern times. I believe that this is no accident. Human beings are tribal and naturally seek to accumulate and preserve resources. This "greed," in varying degrees, is a survival trait that has catapulted us to the top of the evolutionary ladder (and caused quite a few wars in the process). Attempts at true socialism rarely overcome man's base nature and end-up looking like the USSR, and more recently Venezuela, particularly when forced to compete against other aggressive capitalist societies.
The communal business entities you cite are admirable and do not conflict with the capitalist ethos. They are freely entered into business arrangements, compete in the capitalist marketplace, and their niche socialist allure helps attract their target customers.
However, do you believe these relatively small bicycle shops and bakeries could really serve as an economic model for a country as vast and diverse as the United States and achieve anywhere near the same level of comfort, security and prosperity?