During the Industrial Revolution, we saw two very distinct schools of thought emerge: Industrial Capitalism and Socialism.
What are the differences in these two ideologies? How would you define each?
First, let's look back at what Capitalism means...
Capital, as we discussed in class, is money that is available for investment or use by a business (p. 614 in your book). This is usually controlled by private individuals, as, generally speaking, the government doesn't invest in businesses. So, using that definition, Capitalism could be thought of as an economic system in which the private sector owns the means of production, controls the production of goods, and sells those goods to gain capital (money).
Adding to that definition, your text defines Industrial Capitalism like this:
Industrial Capitalism: (p. 620) An economic system based on industrial production or manufacturing.
As we looked at yesterday, the system in place during the Industrial Revolution could be very exploitative, especially when it came to the use of women and children as cheap sources of labor. There were virtually no controls in place that said how long a person could work, how many days they could work, how old they had to be, or what they had to be paid. Obviously, a lot of people were unhappy in this scenario, and there began a movement to look for ways to put some restrictions and guidelines in place. Some people also felt that there should be more of a "sharing of the wealth" going on, since the laborers were getting very little for all of their work and the business owners were getting rich, in come cases, at the expense of the workers.
One school of thought that many people explored was the system known as Socialism. Your text defines Socialism like this:
Socialism: (p. 621) A system in which society, usually in the form of the government, owns and controls the means of production.
Socialists believed that an ideal society could be created where everyone got to share in the wealth of a working situation like those we saw rising up in the Industrial Revolution. Some socialists thought the government should step in and take control of industrial production, making sure that no one got too rich and that everyone got an equal share. One branch of socialism, often referred to as utopian socialism, taught that a "perfect world" scenario could be created where the government could control everything and then take care of all of the people and make sure that all of their needs were met. One such utopian socialist was Robert Owen. He was a British cotton manufacturer that essentially took over a town called New Lanark (in Scotland) and created his ideal utopian society. He then tried the same thing in the United States in a place called New Harmony, Indiana in the 1820's. His American experiment failed because not everyone agreed to the sharing outline that Owen tried to put into place.
Karl Marx, a well-known socialist, felt that utopian socialisists were impractical, but he did feel that socialism had its place. However, Marx didn't think socialism necessarily went far enough. Marx felt that Communism was the ideal situation. Communism takes socialism to an even further extreme where the general population would control the means to production, and there would be no monetary system, no social classes, and there would be pure social order.
QUESTIONS:
Is 100% pure communism even possible? Can you think of a country that we consider to be "communist"? Does that country look like the Marxist communism? Can you think of any flaws in the communist system?
Is human nature the reason Owen's dream utopia of New Harmony failed? Are people naturally competitive and therefore not well-suited to live in a world where everyone is equal and no one has the opportunity to get ahead by working harder or taking risks or making wise investments? Would you want to live in a utopian society, or even a fully socialist society, where no matter how hard you worked, or didn't work, you were going to be taken care of? Is that fair? Would there be any reason to try?
Can you give examples of countries that have socialist governments, or at least strong socialist elements in their government? Does the United States have socialist elements? Can you give examples?
What are the differences in these two ideologies? How would you define each?
First, let's look back at what Capitalism means...
Capital, as we discussed in class, is money that is available for investment or use by a business (p. 614 in your book). This is usually controlled by private individuals, as, generally speaking, the government doesn't invest in businesses. So, using that definition, Capitalism could be thought of as an economic system in which the private sector owns the means of production, controls the production of goods, and sells those goods to gain capital (money).
Adding to that definition, your text defines Industrial Capitalism like this:
Industrial Capitalism: (p. 620) An economic system based on industrial production or manufacturing.
As we looked at yesterday, the system in place during the Industrial Revolution could be very exploitative, especially when it came to the use of women and children as cheap sources of labor. There were virtually no controls in place that said how long a person could work, how many days they could work, how old they had to be, or what they had to be paid. Obviously, a lot of people were unhappy in this scenario, and there began a movement to look for ways to put some restrictions and guidelines in place. Some people also felt that there should be more of a "sharing of the wealth" going on, since the laborers were getting very little for all of their work and the business owners were getting rich, in come cases, at the expense of the workers.
One school of thought that many people explored was the system known as Socialism. Your text defines Socialism like this:
Socialism: (p. 621) A system in which society, usually in the form of the government, owns and controls the means of production.
Socialists believed that an ideal society could be created where everyone got to share in the wealth of a working situation like those we saw rising up in the Industrial Revolution. Some socialists thought the government should step in and take control of industrial production, making sure that no one got too rich and that everyone got an equal share. One branch of socialism, often referred to as utopian socialism, taught that a "perfect world" scenario could be created where the government could control everything and then take care of all of the people and make sure that all of their needs were met. One such utopian socialist was Robert Owen. He was a British cotton manufacturer that essentially took over a town called New Lanark (in Scotland) and created his ideal utopian society. He then tried the same thing in the United States in a place called New Harmony, Indiana in the 1820's. His American experiment failed because not everyone agreed to the sharing outline that Owen tried to put into place.
Karl Marx, a well-known socialist, felt that utopian socialisists were impractical, but he did feel that socialism had its place. However, Marx didn't think socialism necessarily went far enough. Marx felt that Communism was the ideal situation. Communism takes socialism to an even further extreme where the general population would control the means to production, and there would be no monetary system, no social classes, and there would be pure social order.
QUESTIONS:
Is 100% pure communism even possible? Can you think of a country that we consider to be "communist"? Does that country look like the Marxist communism? Can you think of any flaws in the communist system?
Is human nature the reason Owen's dream utopia of New Harmony failed? Are people naturally competitive and therefore not well-suited to live in a world where everyone is equal and no one has the opportunity to get ahead by working harder or taking risks or making wise investments? Would you want to live in a utopian society, or even a fully socialist society, where no matter how hard you worked, or didn't work, you were going to be taken care of? Is that fair? Would there be any reason to try?
Can you give examples of countries that have socialist governments, or at least strong socialist elements in their government? Does the United States have socialist elements? Can you give examples?
No comments:
Post a Comment