2008 Woodie Awards
Economics for Everyone column mischaracterizes socialists
Jose Romero, De Anza student
Issue date: 12/1/08 Section: Letters to the editor
First let me get some things straight. I am a socialist, and no, I don't own a Wii or a plasma TV, much less a car. In fact, I'm a student, an activist and a part-time janitor. And I would like to give some feedback on the "Economics for Everyone" article.
I disagree with the article's statement that "capitalism's flaws can be corrected for."
History has shown how the interests of corporations, multinationals, and firms always stand in the way of any significant reform.
On the other hand, in a command economy, run in a democratic way by the workers and the creators of society's wealth, the possibilities to run society are endless. What matters is human need, not profit.
The reason why there are few planned economies has to do with the Stalinist ideology of those countries, such as the theory of "socialism in one country," the bureaucratic way the countries were run, etc.
Also, I would like to remind La Voz readers, that after the return of capitalism in Russia, poverty and inequality went up, workers lost their jobs, prostitution became widespread and the life expectancy of the Russian people went down.
Capitalism, as Karl Marx analyzed and the current recession confirms, is a system characterized by crisis and cycles of boom and bust. Therefore the corporate elite, in order to save the capitalist system, will more likely push for "Neo-Keynesian" policies arguing for more regulated capitalism, with more government intervention. But history has shown us that, during the Great Depression, even these type of measures weren't enough to end the crisis. WWII was what pulled the economy out of crisis.
Keynesianism will at best ease the effects of the crisis. What we need instead is a socialist society run for the needs of the people.
I disagree with the article's statement that "capitalism's flaws can be corrected for."
History has shown how the interests of corporations, multinationals, and firms always stand in the way of any significant reform.
On the other hand, in a command economy, run in a democratic way by the workers and the creators of society's wealth, the possibilities to run society are endless. What matters is human need, not profit.
The reason why there are few planned economies has to do with the Stalinist ideology of those countries, such as the theory of "socialism in one country," the bureaucratic way the countries were run, etc.
Also, I would like to remind La Voz readers, that after the return of capitalism in Russia, poverty and inequality went up, workers lost their jobs, prostitution became widespread and the life expectancy of the Russian people went down.
Capitalism, as Karl Marx analyzed and the current recession confirms, is a system characterized by crisis and cycles of boom and bust. Therefore the corporate elite, in order to save the capitalist system, will more likely push for "Neo-Keynesian" policies arguing for more regulated capitalism, with more government intervention. But history has shown us that, during the Great Depression, even these type of measures weren't enough to end the crisis. WWII was what pulled the economy out of crisis.
Keynesianism will at best ease the effects of the crisis. What we need instead is a socialist society run for the needs of the people.
Be the first to comment on this story