Capitalism VS Socialism

Recently, there have been clamors on the economic system capitalism in different parts of the world. To trace what caused these clamors, we should look at the root which triggered all of these. The movement called "Occupy Wall Street" or OWS movement, which started in the U.S., motivated many people around the world to change the economic system and question the wealth distribution in their respective countries. In the US, the increasing gap between the rich and the poor has triggered the lower classes to unite. After the sub-prime crisis, many Americans have lost their jobs and their homes. For these people, the main cause of these economic and financial turmoil is the greediness of the capitalists, mainly the bankers. The start of a wild commotion has sparked after the authorities forcibly pushed the homeowners to get out of their own houses for not paying their mortgages in the prescribed time by lenders. A domino effect was created when the people started to default. Even the companies that were categorized as "too big too fail" were shaken by this phenomenon. Who should be the one to be blame? the bankers? the regulators or government? or the people? This is a complicated problem. The only way to solve this problem is to know what caused this downturn. Is this what capitalism has in store for us? Will changing our economic system make our country better? The shout of the OWS movement is "Socialism", which will enable the equal wealth distribution of the people.

To understand the clamors of the people, we should first know what exactly is socialism and what is capitalism. In socialism, all enterprises, businesses, corporations, or income-generating institutions are owned by the state. These businesses are not mainly motivated by profit, since it is state-owned and all its employees have the same amount of income. In the end, all the profits of these income-generating institutions are all distributed to its employees. Fair? At first sight, yes it is, but no economic system is perfect. What do you think is the problem with this? Some literature claim that socialism is the first step to communism. The state or the government tend to change its mind set into a greedier state. With all the work piled up on them, and they get same pay as a blue-collar worker, they tend to think that they deserve better pay and treatment. Now, what is the problem there? greed, corruption, and a step closer to communism. In contrast with socialism, the economic system most of the countries around the world have which is capitalism is motivated to create profits. If you live in a capitalist country, you are familiar with it. Businesses can be owned by any one, and any one can set up its own one. In this system, people are paid according to their jobs, from executive position to the security guard. If you would think about it, everyone is at equal footing here. Although money is the main weapon here, the better you are at what you're doing, the higher the chance that you can beat the system and create money as you wished. The best example would be Bill Gates. So, the criticism of inequality in the system is really invalid. Human beings are naturally greedy. That's why capitalism is the best way to suppress that greediness. Inequality in this system only comes when there is a breach in the regulations. Just like in the sub-prime crisis, sub-prime loans were given mainly because of the "light watch" regulation, where regulations were not implemented strictly. So, the bankers took it as an opportunity to give out loans. To mitigate the risks of the loans the banks gave out, financial derivatives were traded around the world. And that's what triggered the crisis. At present time, the Euro zone is still affected by he crisis.

At the end of the day, no one really knows what is the best economic system. Even countries like North Korea and Russia don't believe in the concept of democratic capitalism or democratic socialism. These countries are prospering in its totalitarian economic system, but in the expense of its people. Now, the question here is: What is more important; your country? or the people? As far as I'm concerned, it is the country. People are animals. They are destroyers. An efficient leader and government should control its people.

The Modern "Nation-State"

Because of globalization, there have been many issues raised on how the relationship of the state and nation. Some say that globalization has lead people of different nations to be non-nationalistic, to an extent that people love nations other than their own. This says many things about the culture, history, and politics of a state.

As I stated in my previous blog, "Restricted Movement of People", you can think of a state as a family, and its inhabitants or citizens are its family members. If a family member knows "how great" another family's situation is, it will make that family member think that his or her own family doesn't do well and might even hate his or her own family. With this perspective, that family member will want to go to that "another" family but it has restrictions. Instead of loving his or her own family, he or she instead will want to go to that family that do better than his or her own. That is one of the reason. One of the reasons could be on the culture or even acceptance. Of course, everyone, even animals, insects and any other living thing, has preferences. Even in large scale, people will prefer one over another. Although it is natural for human beings to have preferences, there are problems associated in this. First, restrictions of other countries should always be respected. Just like in my analogy, you just can't barge in in someone else's family. There are borders and legal procedures that have to be honored by an individual. Going back to the Nation-State, cultural borders are not limited anymore because of globalization. With mix of different cultures, people tend to forget about their past and not understand their own identity which lies on where an individual came from and/or grew up. Apparently, it is important for a state to retain its own culture by doing all the preservation methods that it can use. Globalization has all its advantages, but also has disadvantages. A state took part in globalization at their own risk of mixing other cultures to their own and also sharing their own to the world. Now, in this situation, the prevailing cultures will be of the more prosperous economies because of their market share in the global trade, making other nations know about their culture. For example; the restaurant industry is one of the most saturated market in the world. With all the different kinds of restaurants, people have an idea about the culture of a particular country. In a Japanese restaurant, they serve tea and Japanese food of course. Some restaurants even have small readings about their home country and culture.

To summarize everything I want to say regarding the nation-state relationship; a state has to take care of its people and preserve its oneness in order to maintain order. If a state stopped being a nation, then it will have a problem on identifying its own identity. Unity has to be preserved by the state always, or else there will be chaos inside the state's territory. On the other hand, international organizations promote oneness or unity between states. With a somewhat "individual-ness" of each state, uniting all the states would be a difficult task. Because of clashing cultures and/or differences, wars are inevitable.

Environment and Global Politics

With all the shows, movies, and documentaries portraying and presenting all the adverse effects of global warming to our planet, especially the 'Inconvenient Truth' which is written and starred by Al Gore, environmental concerns have spread globally at a very fast rate. These shows made many people to be familiar with the issue of global warming and how it affects our planet. Although scientists present many scientific evidences and ways on how to reverse global warming, the people and their governments still pay almost no attention to it and take little action on solving it. It is quite ironic, isn't it? The people want to save their planet, yet they take little action on it. Some say that the culprit of all these is 'carboniferous capitalism' with all the carbon emissions and other greenhouse gases produced by all the different corporations around the world, especially oil companies that have oil refineries which produce so much carbon emissions. At this rate, all the trapped greenhouse gases in our planet will eventually destroy our ozone layer, which protects us from harmful sun rays and etc.

Some people claim that there are safer products and environment-friendly ways to produce those products. By environment-friendly, what do they mean by that? Are they really sure that it is not a work of capitalism as well? How sure are they that it is really 'environment-friendly' as they claimed those products to be? What are the products that are good for our environment? Are there really such? Who is any one to say what is good for our environment? I think the issue is not about our world 'dying', but the condition getting worse for HUMANS. It is not that the Earth is dying, but turning into a hostile environment for human beings. It has always been about human beings. It is always about 'us'. We are programmed to be selfish. We think that our race, the human race or homosapiens race, is the most superior race in this world, eventually making us think that we can do 'anything' we want in 'our' planet. The fact that people are not doing something about global warming tells that human beings are so selfish that they are 'busy' doing what they want, or pleasuring themselves, instead of taking action on an issue so important to them. On the other hand, some people claim that the root cause of climate change is the slow shifting of the Earth's polarity. As time goes by, the North Pole and South Pole change their positioning, leading to drastic climate change as we know it.

To wrap it all up, global warming is a complicated issue. After all, it is not only the humans that are affected by this phenomenon but also all the other different species. When all these changes have stabilized, we might all be surprised that the human race has survived and has adapted with all other new species that have adapted as well. If Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution is true, then other species that adapt fast will get to survive these conditions. At this rate, other species that adapt slowly to rapid change of weather conditions and other hostilities will most likely die and go extinct.

Territorial Division

Ever since, there has been prevalence of territorial disputes, which most of the time end up in violence. Distinguishing territorial borders is one of the essentials of a state. If a state doesn't have a specific territory, how can it practice its sovereignty properly? Who are its people? Just like a residency; you specifically state the borders of your house, which is your territory, so that people will know where your area of responsibility is and who to find or who talk to when there is an issue on that particular area. So, in that analogy, are you willing to just let anyone go in your residency? Are you comfortable to let a total stranger come in your residency or house? I'm sure you are not. This is exactly the same in the world's division of territory. In a deeper sense, countries have established their territory in order to exercise their sovereignty and identify its people, which exactly are essentials to a state. Expansion of territory is another thing. Now, regarding this matter, people literally fight for their territory, either for expansion or for protection. Violence is usually the medium of states to fight for territory. Why? Territorial claims are not just about expanding their area of responsibility, but also the resources of a particular area. Way back in time, territorial expansions are prevalent. One of the largest empires, the Roman Empire, expanded their territory through force. They have to wage wars in order to acquire more lands and eventually possessing such empire and territory. With an empire size like that, all its political units' power goes back to the emperor, which is the head of the empire. In a relatively more recent time, the different conquests of the European powers started for them to find more resources which eventually led to colonizing different parts of the world. One of which that we are very familiar with is the Spanish colonization here in the Philippines which lasted for more than three hundred years. At that time, the Philippines were part of the Spanish territory. In present day, everyone knows about the issue about the Spratly Islands. Various Asian states are claiming that these group of islands are part of their territory; namely Brunei, China, Malaysia, Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. Fortunately, these states have decided to tackle this issue in a diplomatic way. If this way of diplomacy fails, all these states will wage war for territorial claims on Spratly islands because of the rumors that these islands have rich commodity resources mostly oil and gas. As much as possible, the Philippines tries its very best to maintain a very good relationship with these states and let our diplomats do their jobs to successfully clear this issue fairly, not our country's soldiers. Hopefully, after the dispute on this group of island, these different states will maintain a good relationship with each other.

Restricted Movement of People

Crossing borders is not always a bad thing. In fact, opening the borders of most countries led to globalization, which triggered free trade all around the world. Globalization, for me, is one of the best ideas that people made. It's quite obvious and common sense that people around the world needs different resources. Countries trade service, money, and resources to satisfy the needs and wants of their countrymen, maintaining economic equilibrium in their country. Of course, trading globally is and should be regulated. If not, just like what is happening today and a direct consequence of unregulated trading, an economic crisis will rise and could jeopardize the welfare of the people. When there is economic disequilibrium, illegal crossing of borders happens more often because people wants to stay in a more stable and more prosperous place. Crossing borders illegally could be a worse thing rather than giving you a better life. People take the risks and do this mainly because of jobs that offer higher wages/salaries. In the case of our fellow countrymen, Filipinos that work overseas, called OFWs (Overseas Filipino Workers), go to other countries for them to earn higher salaries. Some of them even used to be white-collar workers in the Philippines. When they worked outside the country, they accepted jobs for blue-collar workers, usually domestic helpers. For illegal crossing of border, some Filipinos stay beyond their limit on a particular country because of the living conditions of such countries. Filipinos that illegal aliens in other countries are coined here in the Philippines as TNT or "Tago Ng Tago". These people are coined as such because they keep on hiding from authorities in other countries that will deport them or even ban them to go to their country.

In simple terms, a country is like a household. In a household, everyone has their own roles to maintain peace and harmony in the house. A household has a leader, usually the eldest and most experienced, which governs all the people and all the work. If you are part of that household, which makes you a contributor to that certain territory, would you just let anyone step inside your house and enjoy its living conditions which you all worked hard for? Of course, not. It is quite common sense that sovereignty and citizenship are both important to a country. Like I said before, people is the foundation of a country. If you can't even determine your national borders and who your people are, then what kind of country are you? That kind of country is just like a hotel where anyone can stay and go.

People and Power

The reason for structured freedom, even in the most liberal societies, is power. To maintain order, there should ALWAYS be a sovereign ruler. In order to take control of the state, the sovereign ruler has to be more powerful than everyone else in the state. Of course and obviously, quoting what Uncle Ben told Peter Parker in the movie Spiderman 2, "With great power comes great responsibility". At present day, some people wielded with great power are getting irresponsible and not doing their job properly. They just enjoy the privileges of their position. Power should be exercised properly and responsibly. Just like in the Philippines, politicians use their power to hoard money, at the expense of the Filipino people, which is obviously wrong. As time goes by, the trust of the people to the government decreases little by little. Our government, or the so-called government of the "Republic of the Philippines", is one of the most corrupt in the world. We all know that the situation of our country is very bad. So, how can politicians afford to slack-off and create even bigger problems? There is obviously a malpractice of power.

Power is acquired not only through politics but also through ideas. It is not always about the position. Sometimes, ideas, which I believe is the most powerful, wields a person great power. Everyone is unique but society dictates norms. Through powerful ideas, norms or way of living of a society, or even the world, can change. The power of the brain, also called as intellectual, which creates ideas, is so powerful that mindsets of a great number of people could change.

In my personal life, sense of responsibility has always been an essential part of me. I'm a finish-your-responsibilities-before-partying person. Before slacking- off, I make sure everything I have to do is done. With all those responsibilities, we can safely say that I have a certain power wielded. As a 20 year old, I'm already legal. There are things that I enjoy that minors are not allowed to do, such as buying and/or drinking alcoholic drinks and smoking. Still, there are responsibilities that comes with it. If you get drunk, you might end up doing crazy illegal things or even die or kill some one. This brings us back to "sense of responsibility". You have that power simply because you have to do responsibilities. Without those powers, doing those responsibilities would be very hard or even impossible.

People, Households, and the World

A strong foundation of a nation comes from its people or citizens. These individuals form households and/or families. Furthermore, these families and households eventually create a nation or state. Knowing that people is the foundation of a nation, the ruler of a nation should maintain balance in its economy to sustain the demands of its people. For them to achieve sustainable and optimized development, the first step is applying the appropriate economic system. We all know that the purpose of economics is to allocate the finite resources of our world. We all know that there is a thing called "human insatiation", where it is said that humans will never be completely satisfied. With the help of economics, that natural characteristic of humans will be regulated. In relation to the present day situation, people are actually rallying about the economic system in their countries because it failed to improve lives. When the US hit recession in 2008, which is claimed to be worse than the great depression, the whole financial system collapsed and barely recovered. Examining this whole situation, the culprit of all these is the different governments of the western countries. Many chances were presented to them for them to avoid the crisis. Instead of working together, the European countries did not cooperate with the US. Now, the joke's on them. It all started with the "light touch" regulation of the financial system, which gave rise to the most intoxicated financial derivative called the sub-prime mortgage. We all know that human beings are naturally greedy. Financial institutions took advantage of this, making the people suffer from a recession. In Philippine setting, it's the equivalence of corruption in our government. Once again, wrong governance. IMHO, the economic system called capitalism did not fail, but rather the people failed the system. It is the people who runs it who failed to protect its citizens. Also, it's not the government that is to be blame but also the people who are greedy, referring to the corporations who committed fraud and rallyists who want a redistribution of wealth. Instead of trying to improve their lives and live a new life, they rally. I don't think rallying will change something. Powerful people are heartless. The possibility of using violence by the government and powerful people is very high. Not only that these people are unproductive, they are actually causing a negative effect on the economy. Human beings are very complex creatures. Don't forget also that we are considered animals who have two basic instincts, namely survival and reproduction. With all these, global politics is not for people who are irrational. If you are irrational, you are mainly ran by your emotions and instincts. In the end, everything is relative. The word for this subject is "balance".