Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!

Libertarian Socialism vs. Authoritarian Socialism


Does Socialism Itself Actually Reduce Incentive To Work?




For a reference point, we should first look at capitalism (the most
powerful form of trade in the 21st century). Capitalism is a more
productive form of trade than state-communism. We can see states such
as North Korea rotting from within while countries like Iran, Cuba and
China are making free-trade deals and opening up trade barriers to
abandon their stagnant, command economies.

Ofcourse for any capitalist, economist this would seem like a grand
victory for western civilization's laissez-fair approach to international
trade. However, capitalism itself still holds very hierarchical, stagnant
traditions. Perhaps the move from command economies to more free flowing
economies is just an indicator that less authority over the means of
production produces more efficient exchanges.

The idea that authority hinders efficiency over the perceived notion that
socialism itself is a road block to efficiency is a very radical, yet
testable idea. The evidence for this idea can be found in many places.
For example, in a typical, capitalist work-place, the most concerned,
responsible and dedicated worker would be the manager (most likely). He
or she is most concerned due to the fact that he/ or she is given more power
over their own labor. If a worker gets hurt... call the boss. If there
needs to be more soap for the mop bucket... call the boss. The boss will
order everything and will be more concerned about the company's well being
compared to a janitor or someone who's receiving close to minimum wage.

Let's say now that, instead of a small group of managers holding all of
the responsibility, the means of production were handed over to the workers
themselves and there were no bosses. The same idea can be shown for capitalism
opposed to state communism. Let's say, instead of a small, elitist group controlling
the entire economy... we gave that power to the managers, CEO's... etc etc.
The efficiency of production increases as you spread out control.

Well, this theory of worker-management has been tested and (unsurprisingly)
proves true. As you go from government controlled, to boss controlled, then to
worker controlled... the efficiency rises. In the case of the poor, dead horse
that was beaten countlessly in the past by anarchists, ofcourse I'm referring
to the 1936 worker-run workplaces of Barcelona, Spain... it's a widely accepted
fact that their free production society ran more efficiently than capitalism.

However, since capitalism requires some form of state control still, (human
nature apparently doesn't operate nicely under monetary systems of inequality)
the existing establishments which protect its existence are still ruling
over peoples' free will like any other form of government. So while many
would agree that a republic, representative democracy running capitalism is
man's final frontier in our social evolution of government and economy,
many indicators (such as high crime rates, police brutality, economic
depressions, degrading work places of hierarchy... etc) point to man's need to
continuously pursue a more liberated and democratic structure of labor that
goes beyond capitalism.