Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
The list contains economic and political concepts that can co-exist without conflict. Well, in a nutshell.
Oddly enough, all these seemingly dissimilar ideas have a common base: the belief that coercion can be completely replaced by parenting.
All these models of society are based on the assumption that people will voluntarily behave in an exemplary manner and state coercion will not be required. Of course, the idea of “good behavior” among supporters of liberalism, communism and anarchy is different.
liberalism is an ideology that recognizes human rights and dignity as the highest value for society
communism is a classless society of universal equality and prosperity, as well as an ideology that strives for it
anarchy – the absence of power, respectively, anarchism, an ideology that recognizes any coercion and any dictate of power as unacceptable
socialism is a just society of freedom and equality, focused on people, communists consider it an intermediate stage before communism, but some socialists, on the contrary, consider it their goal.
Liberalism and socialism are two basic and opposing political and economic doctrines that have formed the circle of modern political ideas and an explanation of the socio-economic evolution of human society.
Each of these doctrines has its own epistemological basis, as well as its own economic and political theory. All other modernist political doctrines feed on the ideas of these two doctrines with various modifications.
Despite the variety of political variations, the fundamental difference between all doctrines is determined by the attitude to one of two economic theories – liberal (recognition of the market, private property, and freedom of enterprise) or socialist (collectivist economic management). An example of the idea of anarchism is significant in this regard – although, at first glance, the general basis in it is the concept of the absence of the state, in fact, anarcho-capitalism and socialist varieties of anarchism differ fundamentally: ancap describes the possibility of market structures based on private property performing almost any function of the state, which makes it possible to replace the state with the market, while socialist anarchists talk about a certain “withering away” of the state, without describing, however, the mechanism of transformation of state functions, but making it a condition for the complete abolition of private property.
Only liberalism and socialism developed their own interrelated interpretations of such fundamental economic concepts as commodity, money, value, price, capital, credit, interest, payment, etc. All other doctrines are therefore based either on one or the other economic theory, no longer proving or inventing anything. At the same time, it should be understood that the economic theory of socialists, most fully developed by Marx, is not an economic theorysocialism – there is no such thing, only some principles are declared instead-and a critique of the market economy (capitalism).
There are no third or intermediate economic options. Factors of production can be either under private or public control. Even if a part of the means of production is publicly owned in a market economy, this does not make such an economy a mixed economy – it will be dominated by processes determined by free enterprise and free prices. Conversely, even if elements of private ownership are allowed in a collectivist state-run economy, they will still be under State control, subject to state interference, and follow the general plan of the State. It won't be a mixed economy either. The transition from one system to another is difficult and painful, accompanied by shocks that Russia in the twentieth century fully experienced both when entering socialism and when leaving it.
The political structure also corresponds to economic systems: a democratic model in the market and an authoritarian or totalitarian model in a collectivist economy.
Having emerged as a reaction to the market economy, the socialist idea declared its goal to build a just society based on public ownership of the means of production and collective management of society.
Marx put the theory under the socialist idea, taking credit for the fact that he supposedly scientifically proved the inevitability of the arrival of socialism to replace capitalism. He used the terms “communism” and “socialism” interchangeably. At the same time, Marxist theory interprets socialism as the first or transitional stage to communism. Since Marx, socialism as a theory exists in the form of Marxism.
The basic dogma of Marxism is based on the statement that impoverishment of almost the entire population is inevitable against the background of extreme concentration of capital. Since this prediction not only failed to come true, but turned out to be the exact opposite of reality, unsuccessful attempts to correct Marx began – and continue to this day – in the socialist environment, and these attempts received the umbrella name of “neo-Marxism”.
The liberal doctrine, unlike the socialist one, does not set goals and objectives, does not require for its own sake to re-educate a person and achieve the construction of a “capitalist society”. Liberalism only describes society and the economy as the result of natural human activity. A person who has found freedom, guided by the goal of material support for himself and his family, will always consciously engage in production activities in order to exchange the results of his work for others. An enterprising person will find the best conditions for using the accumulated capital to achieve the greatest profit. The free market is not a zero-sum game, where the gains of one are determined by the losses of the other, but the fruit of social cooperation, associated with reconciliation and coordination of the selfish goals of individuals.
A person from birth has natural rights, the protection of which is the main responsibility of the state.
This is if in two, well, maybe three words.