|
Collectivism
holds that man is just a tool to be exploited for the common good
and that pursuing his personal happiness is evil. So says Raymond
Samuels' II in his new book Capitalism
is Not Democracy, published by the far left "not
for profit" Agora Publishing Consortium. There's a problem,
however; the book's premise seems to contradict the very nature
of man.
Samuels' argument that capitalism is a threat to Canada's social-democratic
system, and is therefore evil, is laughable. The system for which
he holds such high regard is infamous for its inefficiencies and
infringements on individual rights. One of the most obvious examples
- Canada's health care system - has failed miserably. Never was
the old saying, "You get what you pay for" more true.
Years of waiting for simple operations, doctors with little incentive
to learn about new medicines or progress in the medical industry,
along with all the other problems that accompany socialized medicine
have led to shoddy health care.
Raymond Samuels
II would have us believe that this abhorrent system should be
the only option for the individual; that a desire to pay for quality
health care is wrong because it isn't "free." Apparently,
the thought never occurred to Samuels that perhaps greed is the
most efficient motivator. It never dawned on him that perhaps
if all medical specialists were allowed to practice in a competitive
free market, they would have the incentive to provide quality
care.
This fact
seems to elude liberals on a frighteningly consistent basis. Their
desire for "free" everything has taken over reason and
logic. The thought that the private health care system is "greed
driven" makes it wrong in the eyes of the collectivist who
believes that anyone operating for there self interest is evil
and should be stripped of all rights to the fruit of their industry
- completely ignoring the history that proves lack of incentives
leads to poor quality, regardless of what industry we're talking
about.
But the most interesting element of the book is Samuels' argument
that capitalism contradicts Christianity, for Christ "healed
the sick without demands for financial compensation. He proselytized
in defense of the poor and other peoples who were being oppressed
by a wealthy elite, who sought to perpetuate their status and
power." Again, the ugliness of collectivism shows its face.
Samuels, like many left-wingers, thinks that altruism and self-sacrifice
are the highest moral principals. However, history has proven
as Adam Smith observed that the highest moral principle is to
strive for our individual happiness and our life. This has proven
time and again to be the answer to providing the best results
for the most people.
Samuels' concept
of self-sacrifice wouldn't be so bad if he defined it as a personal
choice. But like many other liberals, he thinks it is an obligation
that must be enforced by the government, using initiation of force
over other men… because it is a "good thing".
Socialism has long held the sentiment that wealth is evil. Wealth,
not recognized by socialists, is but a tool for the individual
to achieve his personal happiness. Socialism is therefore a system
striving to abolish individual happiness in the name of "social
justice" - that somehow, some way, those who have acquired
"too much" wealth somehow cheated or exploited others
to get it. And certainly, there are those who did achieve success
this way. But like all other classes of society, those who engage
in this criminal behavior are in the minority. For the most part,
those who acquire a great amount of wealth did so by providing
goods, services, and jobs to the public.
Some might
say they did it for no other reason than selfishness and greed
- that they did not really care about their fellow man. But nothing
in a capitalist society is done without the need of others. You
need food. Others grow it so you don't need to grow it or hunt
it yourself. You need clothes. Others make them so you don't have
to. There are countless ways in which the needs of man are satisfied
by others who can do it quickly, cheaply, and with good quality.
If you didn't have needs, there would be need for those who provide
them. If incentive is abolished and government takes away the
right to financial reward, nothing would be produced and poverty
would be rampant. The positive and efficient aspects of capitalism
are merely side effects to individual rights. The philosophy that
each man should have the liberty to strive for his personal happiness
is what provides so many with so much.
Raymond Samuels II is quick to point out that Capitalism is not
democracy. Perhaps that's a good thing. Pure democracy can be
a recipe for tyranny. It is a situation in which, as Thomas Jefferson
once said, "51% of the people take away the rights of the
other 49%." Unlimited, unchecked democracy is just as much
a threat to individual liberty as is fascism, socialism, or communism.
The founders of America went through a great deal to make sure
America is not a democracy, but a constitutional republic, so
that each individual would retain his rights.
Individual
rights are not important to the collectivist liberal. The individual
to them is but a slave to the "common good."
Raymond Samuels II and his book demonstrate the blatant
faults in collectivism. If it were not for self interest and free
market capitalism, technology, medicine, and every convenience
we enjoy in our lives today would not exist because there would
be no incentive to create it. The wealth and high quality of life
so many of us enjoy would have not been possible. The destitution
and confiscation of individual rights is the order of the day
under any other economic system. The success of America has always
been based on the idea of liberty, choice, and the pursuit of
happiness. That is why Canada has long been lagging behind us.
There anti-capitalist, anti-individualism is not only morally
wrong, it has long crippled their economy and their quality of
life. If somehow organizations like Agora Publishing Consortium
snapped out of their dream that the individual should be a slave
for the common good, they might realize what heights an individual
can reach in a free market capitalism and individual rights.
|
