Socialism: A Superior Ideology for Equal Economic Opportunities

Socialism is defined based on its collective ownership of the production systems. This research gives reasons why socialism is a superior ideology that offers equal economic opportunities for all citizens.

Socialism
Student’s name
Institution Affiliation(s)

Introduction
Socialism is defined based on its collective ownership of the production systems as noted
by (Golley, 2016). It is based on the fact that co-operate management and means of production is
owned socially, as it also considers political principles geared towards asserting the system. This
economic system values equality as opposed to achievement as workers are reward according to
their time and not the value they produce. It’s a system where citizens depend on the government
for everything including food and healthcare. Socialism is based on central organization that is
rather bureaucratic and ownership that is collective. The question is, why should socialism be
accepted over capitalism? Those proposing socialism claim it creates equality and a secure
economy, while capitalism is based on exploiting majority at the benefit of the rich few.
Examples of economies that run on the basis of socialism include China, Cuba, and Vietnam.
Thesis statement: This research gives reasons why socialism is a superior ideology that offers
equal economic opportunities for all citizens.
Socialism arose out of the aspiration to protect worker’s rights following the industrial
revolution. Socialists sought to eradicate social classes that emerged from capitalism and
promote equality. 19th century socialists rejected the foundations of capitalism that resulted
following the industrial revolution that the wealthy deserved their wealth since they are the ones
who had created it (Barrow, 2015). They based their argument on the hypothesis that wealth is
created by the working class and wrongfully commandeered by the rich. Therefore, the rich were
gaining at the expense of their labourers who they underpaid. They equated labour to capital,
arguing that they were equally important, and attributed the cause of poverty and despair to
capitalism. Socialists fronted the ideals of equality, democracy, cooperation and shared
prosperity.

Socialism and capitalism are always considered as opposite sides of the economic
spectrum, the pivotal argument being upon equality and role of government. Those for socialism
claim inequality has shortfalls and the government should be responsible to bring parity by
creating programs that will benefit the poor, while capitalists argue that resources are better
placed in the hands of the private sector and not the government as the society is well placed
with a free market capable of having winners and losers (Fatehi & Baimuratov, 2012).
With regards to democracy, socialist philosophers like Rousseau argued that real
democracy could not survive societies with great disparity of wealth and poverty. He argued that
whichever the electoral system, power naturally tends move towards wealth. During the
industrial revolution, the bourgeoisie created various democratic movements gained momentum
across Europe (Moodliar & Wallis, 2018). This is because they viewed their economic and
political ideals as interdependent. Social democracy was central to passing laws that would
enable business to thrive and, also to guarantee their property rights. Marx argued that for social
democracy to exist, a revolution was inevitable, where the majority in the society would seize
power from a tiny minority of capitalists for the common good of all the people.
Social democracy as a key pillar of socialism, evolved to counter situations where a
minority in the ruling class controlled both the economy, and the decision making. Socialism
advocated for the economy to be owned and controlled by the people as a whole. This was to be
implemented through the formation of labour and socialists parties across the globe. Though
initially these parties registered some electoral success, they ended up being absorbed into the
conventional political activities rather than creating the revolution envisaged under Marx
revolution (Douthat, 2010).

Socialist ideals saw the formation of labour movements across the globe, even in the
traditionally conservative U.S. These labour movements registered success, though the union
members were often beaten, shot, imprisoned and faced all manner of obstacles from the
capitalists (Wolikow, 2017). Their campaign led to shortening of the working day, improve
working conditions and demand a better pay for its members. Labour movements still play a role
today. Nevertheless, labour movements are blamed for the failure of a revolution the kind
envisaged by Marx since most workers did not see the necessity of destroying the very system
they were building.
Another form of socialism whose impacts can be felt today was advocated by Ferdinand
Lassalle, who argued for the formation of voluntary workers cooperatives as the basis of
socialism. Lassalle’s cooperatives are seen as the front runners to many organizations that exist
today in the centre of capitalism, for example, credit unions and mutual insurance companies.
Some scholars argue that the cooperatives did not achieve the socialist ideals, but rather offered
alternatives for profit making (Dawson, 2013).
Rosa Luxemburg, who was murdered alongside her comrade Karl Liebknecht, was a
leader of a socialist movement. She was an activist for a socialist rather than a capitalist
community. Demonstrations, by socialist, take place every year and act as a reminder to the
Germans that the working class should not rely on social-democratic leaders and reformists to
build a socialist society (Feigel, 2019). Luxemburg criticized the 1st World War due to use of
imperialism and capitalism rather than relying on moralistic basis. Luxemburg’s influenced
people globally.
Capitalism creates the power of monopoly. Privately owned companies tend to gain
power to monopolize labor and product markets. This might lead to these firms misusing these

powers to charge higher prices at will. With these powers firms can opt to pay low wages to the
workforce and as commonly seen, there always seems to be great imparity between those who
own capital and those working for these firms (Kerswell & Lin, 2017). Capital base economy
tends to ignore social benefits. Negative factors such as pollution are likely to be ignored by
private owned firms hence undermining living standards. On the other hand they can ignore
positive factors such as health when producing their goods, education and public transportation,
and this is likely to lead to resource allocation that is not efficient. Capitalism offers the right to
own wealth privately and pass it on as inheritance, this leads to inequality in terms of wealth. As
argued by capitalists, wealth is gained through hard work but mostly people become rich because
they were born in privileged families or through inheritance of what they never worked for.
Hence the system of capitalism fails not only to create equality in terms of outcome but also in
terms of opportunities. With inequality, come social class resentments and separations. The
system also leads to a diminished wealth in terms of marginal utility. Capitalists encourage the
fact that it is good for people to earn more, this leads to income inequality (Patomäki, 2017). A
millionaire earning another million does not see much impact of it in economic goodness. If the
same million is used to provide necessary health services there is a huge impact felt. Lastly
economies based on such principles tend to go through the boom and bust cycles that lead to
inflation and unemployment
Conclusion
In conclusion, socialism is more efficient as compared to capitalism. This is because
means of production is with a planning authority that is central and not the market force that
plans within a chosen end. Survey on resources is done exhaustively and their use is done more
efficiently. The system is for a greater welfare as it has less chances of income inequality as the

means of production is not privately owned. In the system everyone is meant to work hard.
Socialism creates an economy that is monopoly free. This is due to the fact that the state owns
the means of production. This creates state monopoly that is geared towards the benefit of the
people. Business fluctuation is not experience in socialism as planning is done generally. This
helps in coordination of different departments of production hence eliminating discrimination
experienced between investing and saving and puts the available resources to the best use. This
gives it a grip on overproduction and prevents deflation trends. With a well-planned social
system, the economy operates in a right manner as it moves toward growth, because planning is
adopted towards growth.

References
Barrow, L. (2015). Socialism: Historical Aspects. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International
Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition) (pp. 836–843).
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.62097-4
Dawson, W. (2013). German Socialism and Ferdinand Lassalle. Retrieved March 28, 2019, from
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/44271376-german-socialism-and-ferdinand-
lassalle
Douthat, R. (2010, January 6). Debating Social Democracy. Retrieved March 28, 2019, from
https://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/debating-social-democracy/
Fatehi, K., & Baimuratov, U. (2012). Capitalism of the future. International Journal of
Commerce and Management, 22(4), 328–337.
https://doi.org/10.1108/10569211211284511
Feigel, L. (2019, January 9). The Murder of Rosa Luxemburg review – tragedy and farce. The
Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/jan/09/the-murder-
of-rosa-luxemburg-by-klaus-gietinger-review
Golley, J. (2016). A ‘socialist’ economy in a capitalist world. Journal of Chinese Economic and
Business Studies, 14(1), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/14765284.2015.1132925
Kerswell, T., & Lin, J. (2017). Capitalism Denied with Chinese Characteristics. Socialism and
Democracy, 31(2), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/08854300.2017.1332262
Moodliar, S., & Wallis, V. (2018). Socialism and Democracy: A Conversation. Socialism and
Democracy, 32(1), 152–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/08854300.2018.1444877
Patomäki, H. (2017). Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crisis. Journal of Critical Realism,
16(5), 537–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767430.2017.1332807

Wolikow, S. (2017, February 21). The Left and the Labour Movement in Europe – What
History? From the 19th to the 21st Century. Retrieved March 28, 2019, from
https://www.transform-network.net/en/publications/yearbook/overview/article/yearbook-
2017/the-left-and-the-labour-movement-in-europe-what-history-from-the-19th-to-the-
21st-century/