| | The previous experience of the ''free world'' and the current situation in the countries that belong to it
Here we give a very brief, popularly presented and far from exhaustive overview of the basic features and patterns of socio-economic development during the period of existence of capitalist production relations. Attention is focused on the factors that ensured the extremely successful long-term development of some societies in the past, and on the factors that have become the main causes of current crisis phenomena and trends.
Those researchers of socio-economic processes whose theories we consider the most convincing see two basic factors that determine the success of a particular society.
The first and most important factor is the availability of opportunities for free enterprise based on private property. Wherever capitalist production began to develop, which took place under much less state influence than today, very rapid economic growth occurred. The process of development of “wild capitalism” led to significant costs, in particular, the impoverishment of groups of the population who were deprived of their usual means of earning a living. However, the development of production, science, technology, education and, as a result, the growth of total wealth, have provided people with many new opportunities and allowed many of them to improve their quality of life.
Another factor that also significantly influences the nature and success of development is the cultural peculiarities of population, such as dominant values and beliefs, customs, habitual patterns of behavior. Historically, the culture of different societies was largely formed on a religious basis, but was also transmitted to those of their members who were not religious. Comparison of the processes and results of development of different societies shows that not all cultures contribute equally to economic success and wealth growth. The best driver of development turned out to be a culture based on the Protestant faith, which has been clearly demonstrated during the very long and unusually successful period of development of the new state on the North American continent as well as the comparatively more successful development of Protestant countries and the activities of Protestant entrepreneurs in other countries.
The development of cultures in different societies is a long-term process that is influenced by many circumstances and events, the course of which depends, among other things, on the previously formed cultural properties of those societies. The development of societies is also influenced by events that are not the result of objective laws, but rather a random coincidence of circumstances or subjective factors. Such factors include the activities of specific individuals in specific periods that had a significant impact on the lives of their contemporaries. Some ideas on social and state structure, proposed and implemented by specific thinkers and politicians, became real inventions, no less important than revolutionary inventions in technology or the organization of production. A striking example of inventions of this kind can be considered the principles laid down by the Founding Fathers of the United States in the model of the structure of this country. There is no doubt that such a cleverly designed state structure has helped to take maximum advantage of the fundamental factors mentioned above.
In countries where there were more or less suitable conditions for the development of free enterprise, the economy developed at a rapid pace, giving an increasing part of the population the opportunity to escape from poverty. Societies in these countries found more and more opportunities to help those who could not take care of themselves and didn't have relatives who could do so. Private charity developed, and numerous public and religious charitable organizations emerged that solved social problems without any help from the states. Successful entrepreneurs actively financed the creation and operation of educational and medical institutions and even fundamental scientific research. These processes have reached a particularly impressive scale in the United States, the most successful country of developing capitalism. It seemed that, overall, not without problems, wars, etc., the world was moving towards a better future.
However, there were also people who could not calmly look at the wealth accumulated by successful entrepreneurs. They hatched ideas on how wealth could be forcibly redistributed, and many of them justified such ideas with the intention of achieving greater justice. It must be acknowledged that workers often had real reasons for strong dissatisfaction with their working and living conditions, which created good ground for the spread of ideas of fighting capitalists and redistribution of material wealth. Nationalist ideas also gained ground and support, which, like communist ones, assumed the subordination of the interests of individuals (of course, for the common good) to the interests of state, and all this was impossible without strict restrictions on personal freedom. We all remember the popular expression about good intentions and what is paved with these intentions. The 20th century became the century of experiments carried out on the human masses by various passionaries who promised to lead them to a happy future by the shortest route. Anyone who has studied history knows about the amount of suffering and human casualties among those on whom these experiments were conducted, often with their own consent and support.
By the end of the last century, those countries that became so-called legal, democratic and social states turned out to be more prosperous compared to other participants in those turbulent processes. People from less developed countries often pay attention only to the standard of living in those rich countries and the amount of social benefits available to their residents, and regard their political and socio-economic systems as unquestionable models to follow. However, on closer and more critical examination, much of what is happening there looks alarming and disappointing. These societies are experiencing growing problems and contradictions that they are trying to alleviate, but which are fundamentally unresolvable within the framework of welfare state systems.
Almost all countries of the ''free world'' are experiencing a slow but continuous degradation of education, health care and services. This is a consequence of excessive bureaucratic regulation, the strong influence of closely connected to the state monopolies and trade unions, etc. The imbalances in the structure of the economy are constantly growing, not only is the number of officials increasing, but an artificially created excess demand for the services of lawyers, psychologists, trainers and tutors, and for some other categories of services. Lobbyists for some industries, particularly in the health care sector, have successfully promote their interest not in radically solving health problems and preventing occurrence of these problems, but in maintaining continued dependence of their consumers on the consumption of their products. And so on. All this is accompanied by a general deterioration in the quality of the cultural environment and is aggravated by the demographic problem. It should be noted here that the decline in the birth rate in a post-industrial society is a rather complex, multifactorial phenomenon and a problem that is caused not only by the influence of a particular system of social structure. However, it is precisely in countries with a democratic social state that this problem and its consequences are exacerbated.
The decline in the number of working-age population is partially compensated by an influx of immigrants, which, however, creates new problems. The previously proclaimed policy of ''multiculturalism'' has shown its inconsistency, and it is becoming increasingly obvious that the bearers of cultures that are poorly compatible with traditional Western culture, and even hostile to it, are a serious threat to societies of Western civilization. However, thanks to the still relatively high standard of living, they have so far managed to attract not only low-skilled workers, but also educated, skilled and enterprising people from less wealthy countries. This influx of ''fresh blood'' slows down the process of degradation, but the countries from which these people leave find themselves without development prospects. Attempts to stimulate the birth rate with cash benefits for children led to the transformation of childbirth by single mothers into a way of earning money. This method began to be widely used by women from the lower social classes, as a result of which a significant part of the younger generation grew up in single-parent families, in an environment with a low culture and found themselves deprived of the ability to fully socialize.
In many democratic countries, deficit budgets are passed year after year, and the government debt grows, often to such an extent that its repayment seems unrealistic. Financial imbalances are exacerbated by the existence of a fundamentally flawed pension system, in which pensioners are provided for at the expense of the working part of the population, the share of which is steadily declining due to the aforementioned demographic problem. Under various plausible pretexts, there is a creeping restriction of individual liberties, which are a basic civilizational value. At the same time, the state is doing an increasingly worse job of ensuring public safety. For political, populist reasons, laws and practices are introduced that undermine the protection of the rights of property owners and entrepreneurs in favour of those who are inclined to a parasitic lifestyle. Etc.
We agree with those who see the main reason for the problems of democracies in the victory of the statist approach at this stage of historical development. The ruling bureaucratic class, under the pretext of caring for the disadvantaged part of the population, using the opportunity to bribe voters with funds from taxes and government loans, managed to gain stable control over state. The key factor that ensures the dominance of left-wing politicians and bureaucrats is universal suffrage, under which they are interested in increasing the number of people dependent on state subsidies and voting for their policies. In the post-industrial era, there has been a certain mutation of left-statist forces and their ideology. When the theme of protecting the working class from ''oppression'' by capitalists lost its relevance, supporters of leftist ideas found other ''oppressed'' who supposedly needed aggressive protection, as well as other ''enemies'' to fight, of course, using state institutions, and doing so more and more actively. All this had a negative impact, among other things, on the institution of political leadership. Today's democratic systems produce leaders who are good at exploiting the current mood of voters and influencing them through the media, but who are incapable of working for the true and long-term strategic interests of the entire society, including helping society to rightly understand these interests.
The inability of democratic governments to think and act strategically also affects their foreign policy. In particular, the most powerful countries in economic and military terms are showing a blatant impotence and shortsightedness in confronting criminal and terrorist regimes, which raises concerns for the fate of the entire ''free world''. The inadequacy of the policies of national governments is also the cause of the imperfection of international institutions, in the activities of which there is much that is absurd and even criminal. The peoples of some countries are represented in international organizations by officials of criminal regimes who, in essence, are the enemies of these peoples. Resources from international humanitarian programs end up at the disposal of regimes in poor countries, whose power is the main cause of poverty in these countries, and often these resources are used to support terrorist organizations. And so on.
All previous experience proves that social systems with an excessively large state performing functions that could be performed by business or public organizations are fundamentally ineffective. There are many illustrative examples from the past and present, when private business solves even very large-scale problems much better and several times cheaper than government structures do. Therefore, many states try to maintain acceptable conditions for doing business so that entrepreneurs can ensure the normal functioning of the economy, but governments cannot do without high taxes, excessive regulation and the abuse of money printing, which leads to inflation. Politicians and the public in welfare states try, albeit not very actively, to improve their systems in order to maintain their stability and relative social well-being. In particular, systems of economic and financial regulation are being improved, and many government institutions use modern information and management technologies mostly invented by private business. The best results in improving state and related institutions are achieved by some of small countries with a fairly high cultural level of the population. These countries have low levels of corruption and and some of them even haven't too high government debt, but even they fail to completely eliminate the negative tendencies and contradictions that are the result of fundamental system flaws.
In the last century and the beginning of the current one there have been several cases of governments coming to power that pursued, at least in economics, liberal policies directed against the dominant social-statist trends. These were Erhard's reforms in Germany under Adenauer, the reforms in Chile under Pinochet, the policies of the Thatcher cabinet in England, ''Reaganomics'' in the United States, and Bendukidze's reforms in Georgia under Saakashvili. These attempts brought excellent results to the economies of those countries. However, in all the cases mentioned, the statist politicians and the bureaucracy managed to take revenge after some time and return to power, using well-practiced populist methods and, by the way, the positive results of unpopular measures taken during the previous period of economic liberalization. Ultimately, the “economic miracles” in these countries ended and everything returned to the old rut.
In recent decades, there have also been attempts to introduce democratic models of social order in underdeveloped countries with the help of developed countries. These attempts resulted in a waste of large resources but did not produce the expected results. This is yet another confirmation of the inability of even the most influential l and economically powerful states with the current form of democratic system to develop and implement adequate strategies.
Looking at what is happening today in the countries of the ''free world'', we come to the conclusion that the best thing for them would be to return to the path from which they began to turn more than a hundred years ago. To that model of society where the state didn't interfere in economic relations, didn't take on social security, and where all problems, except for a limited narrow list of them, were successfully solved by a constantly growing richer society. By returning to that original path of free development on a new turn of the historical ''spiral'', society could create a much more perfect organizational models, taking into account all the experience and scientific achievements. In particular, knowing all the tricks successfully used by forces hostile to liberty, it would be possible to prevent something like this in the future.
However, in a historically very short period of time, the majority of the population has become firmly convinced that it is the state that should take care of every person from birth to death. It does not occur to those who think so that the growing problems are created by the system itself, the necessity of which they don't doubt. They believe that to solve problems it is enough to elect better politicians who can pass better laws. Moreover, countries with democratic welfare states still appear, from many points of view, to be quite prosperous and life there seems to be in full swing. These countries haven't yet exhausted the solid reserve of strength created during a not very long period of freer development than in recent times.
Despite the relative prosperity, quite a few sane people are not only concerned about negative trends in the economy, but also disapprove of the accompanying gradual destruction of the foundations of Western (in the broad sense) civilization, including the aggressive imposition of absurd ideas and practices. Society, including some famous figures in big business, is responding to these trends with certain increase in support for right-wing and anti-etatist political forces, which, unfortunately, are still poorly organized, not influential enough, don't have a clear strategy and are forced to resort to populism, like their opponents. It must be acknowledged that left-wing politicians and representatives of the bureaucratic class are good at defending their group interests, often doing so instinctively, while supporters of a freer society lack energy, pragmatism and the ability to self-organize.
In all likelihood, the crisis of the “free world” must reach its more acute phase in order for a sufficiently large number of people to recognize the danger of destructive processes and support the necessary changes or at least not resist them. Persistence in pursuing a dead-end path and unwillingness to eliminate the fundamental causes of problems will lead to bankruptcy sooner or later, which will force society to make difficult but necessary decisions. Let us hope that humanity will eventually be able to overcome this ''childhood disease'' called democratic socialism, which, by all appearances, was as inevitable, just as the ''diseases'' of communism and fascism. Compared to the length of human history, both the emergence of such diseases and their cure will take just moments. But for people, despite the acceleration of development processes, this will seem like a distant future that not everyone can see. Such changes will occur over the course of several generations and can be accompanied by events that many will not like. There is no doubt that the beneficiaries of social democratic state systems will try to delay the bankruptcy of these systems. Their activities appear to be a grand political and economic fraud, as they stupefy, bribe and deprave a significant part of society for their own selfish interests. They profit themselves and feed a huge number of people who don't want to work or are artificially deprived of the opportunity to work at the expense of those who work, as well as at the expense of future generations. The longer these systems exist, the more expensive it will be for future generations to pay to resolve the fundamental problems that have accumulated.
We belong to the minority of people who are not very interested in living in this slowly fading prosperity, and who understand that any of their even very productive and useful activities within a hopeless socio-economic system simultaneously contributes to the prolongation of its existence. We and our like-minded people are those who would like to become part of a more advanced and promising community, and we are exploring the possibilities and thinking about realistic ways to achieve this in in today's ''free world'', which, unfortunately, is so far from perfect.
Comment this on Facebook or X (Twitter). NEXT >> |
|
| |
