Modern political theory is based on two major pillars... Autonomy and accountability
that is freedom / liberty and responsibility...
the reason why they are so important is because
a) Absolute liberty is nobodies freedom... That means if a state/society gives absolute liberty to a person, it also means the person is at liberty to encroach on others freedom...Its simple I have the freedom to kill , steal, rob, rape etc etc...
this was the major flaw in the concept of Liberalism...
b)Every bodies responsibility means no bodies responsibility
the problem with socialism was based on social responsibility ..
as every body was suppose to receive goods and services in accordance to their needs and not in coherence with their contribution to the society.
that mean you can contribute zilch and still get your necessities.
the production and contribution as I said was a social responsibility , that meant if one shirked he cant be reprimanded.. Hence every body would shirk...
hence no production.
Hence the socialist created this concept of dignity of labour.. or moral values for people , which made them not shirk but contribute...
As whole concept of socialism even though is for the so call proletariat it is a doctrine for the educated and people with high moral values...
which in country is always not possible... Hence most socialist / communist nations are dictatorship...
in country like India Socialism is bound to fail as it is first a democracy.. Secondly we dont have any dignity of labour.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
hey abhigyan!
good to see a new blogger in the virtual world...all the best for this new venture of yours.
well..somethings that i would like to counter...firstly dignity of labour implies respect for all kinds of work...it means to value everyone's worth irrespective of their class status...
as for socialism's failure in india..i do not believe that what we had in nehru's time was socialism...it was state led capitalism...all it created was an entire rent seeking class by colluding with the middle classes...ther was no serious effort to give some semblance of equality, by reducing institutionally generated inequalites...a case in point would be the failed land reforms...
that this led to low productivity was obvious...inevitably rent seekers have no incentive to perform...
if you are trying to make a case against subsidies or doles (when you are talkign about people getting rewards despite producing zilch)...then my argument would be that in a system that perpetuates inequality, when the state has failed in ensuring equal opportunity to each of its citizens, subidies are not justified...so if someone is not able to produce because he does have the ability to do so despite trying...then that implies that he needs to be made able to earn a livelihood...
of course you will have free riders..but that can be reduced to a minimal number...and lets not forget often the free riders in society are not always the most deprived ones...anyone who evades taxes is also a free rider...
of course i don't agree entirely with the notion of socialism.where no one has an incentive to compete...but i definitely believe in a more equal society that honours individual freedom and achievements that are not built by depriving someone of even a dignified life.
am in a slight rush right now..but would love to continue the debate...
good going abhigyan..i hope you didn't think that i punned on your name when i called that post on my blog "a big yawn"!:)
well firstly my first post didnot publish , but now its online..
secondly i really dont belive communism ever exsisted in india.. what was what political scientist call fabianism or quasi fabianism.. a kind of democratic socialism.. Mixed economy .
now you can actually go through my first post where i have tried to demarcate the intricacies..
Well What we had by no way was capitalism either..what about MRTP, licence Raj, Quota system ...
it was what we call a mix bag of evils.. that is u mix two doctrines .. but the mistakes of both
Post a Comment