Socialism: A Superior Ideology for Equal Economic Opportunities

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).