CHAPTER III OVERCOMING DESTRUCTIONISM
§ 1 the ‘Interest’ as an Obstacle to Destructionism
People’s political beliefs are shaped by the class they belong to. The bourgeoisie, or the wealthy class, supports capitalism to protect their interests. In contrast, the proletariat, or working class, aims to end the exploitation of capitalism and move towards socialism. Liberalism is often seen as a way for the bourgeoisie to express their interests, but it actually promotes private property for the benefit of all, not just the rich.
Opponents of socialism usually recognize that keeping private property benefits the wealthy but fail to see that a smaller class defending its interests against the larger population is likely to fail. Liberalism focuses on the common good and suggests that socialism might lower the overall income available, even if it reduces inequality.
For entrepreneurs, or business owners, their wealth is not secure under capitalism. They cannot ensure their children will succeed like feudal lords could with their descendants. If socialism were to be introduced slowly, entrepreneurs might actually benefit because they could receive compensation when their property is taken from them.
Additionally, entrepreneurs focus on adjusting to changes in the economy rather than fighting against socialism. They may work together with workers when negotiating and push back against certain laws, but they do not see socialism as something to fight against in principle.
Ultimately, no one really has reasons to fully support capitalism. Liberalism aims to benefit everyone by finding a balance between personal interests and the public good. Even though some individuals might benefit from socialist policies, it is argued that overall, no one would be better off with socialism compared to a system where private property is respected.
§ 2 Violence and Authority
The belief that private property is a special right for its owners comes from old ideas about property, which often began with taking things by force. Historically, property ownership started with violence and theft, and this history still affects how people talk about property today, especially in Europe. People who criticize property rights often face strong backlash, just like in the struggles between the German nobles and social democratic groups. Defenders of private property claim it is held up by power, using force instead of fair reasons. Their main argument is about "acquired rights," but this argument doesn't work if most people think property is unfair. In their worry about losing their privileges, some wealthy people ask the Church to keep the poor from wanting more, but this request is seen as unfair. The Church should not support unfair systems that hurt most people. In the end, socialist ideas cannot be stopped by force or authority because these forces often support socialism. Most people today do not believe in capitalism and want a fairer sharing of wealth and happiness.
§ 3 the Battle of Ideas
The failure of Socialist experiments does not disprove Socialism itself; instead, it highlights the differences in how facts are interpreted. Supporters of Socialism blame private property for societal issues and continue to believe in its potential to solve those problems. They often disregard the failures of their system, focusing instead on blaming Capitalism. In contrast, Capitalism and Liberalism rely on logical reasoning and appeal to rational thought, while Socialism often stirs emotions, which can give it a temporary advantage in swaying public opinion, especially among those who may not think critically.
However, the belief that public opinion and mass psychology shape dominant ideas is overestimated. Although the masses may not think deeply, they look to intellectual leaders who guide them. Socialism’s prominence arises not from mass thought but from the ideas of a small group of thinkers who have influenced society. If these intellectuals were to abandon Socialism, its influence would diminish. Society is fundamentally shaped by ideas rather than material conditions.
Liberalism recognizes the interconnectedness of social institutions, while Socialism tends to focus on individual issues in isolation. Critics within Liberalism often adopt a Socialistic viewpoint by trying to fix perceived problems without understanding the systemic consequences. They mistakenly argue that Socialism is a noble ideal that could work if humanity were morally superior, but this is flawed reasoning. The ability to calculate and rationally manage an economy is essential for any sustainable system, a quality that Socialism lacks. Ultimately, if people stop believing that Socialism will improve their welfare, its support will fade.
§ 1 the ‘Interest’ as an Obstacle to Destructionism
People’s political beliefs are shaped by the class they belong to. The bourgeoisie, or the wealthy class, supports capitalism to protect their interests. In contrast, the proletariat, or working class, aims to end the exploitation of capitalism and move towards socialism. Liberalism is often seen as a way for the bourgeoisie to express their interests, but it actually promotes private property for the benefit of all, not just the rich.
Opponents of socialism usually recognize that keeping private property benefits the wealthy but fail to see that a smaller class defending its interests against the larger population is likely to fail. Liberalism focuses on the common good and suggests that socialism might lower the overall income available, even if it reduces inequality.
For entrepreneurs, or business owners, their wealth is not secure under capitalism. They cannot ensure their children will succeed like feudal lords could with their descendants. If socialism were to be introduced slowly, entrepreneurs might actually benefit because they could receive compensation when their property is taken from them.
Additionally, entrepreneurs focus on adjusting to changes in the economy rather than fighting against socialism. They may work together with workers when negotiating and push back against certain laws, but they do not see socialism as something to fight against in principle.
Ultimately, no one really has reasons to fully support capitalism. Liberalism aims to benefit everyone by finding a balance between personal interests and the public good. Even though some individuals might benefit from socialist policies, it is argued that overall, no one would be better off with socialism compared to a system where private property is respected.
§ 2 Violence and Authority
The belief that private property is a special right for its owners comes from old ideas about property, which often began with taking things by force. Historically, property ownership started with violence and theft, and this history still affects how people talk about property today, especially in Europe. People who criticize property rights often face strong backlash, just like in the struggles between the German nobles and social democratic groups. Defenders of private property claim it is held up by power, using force instead of fair reasons. Their main argument is about "acquired rights," but this argument doesn't work if most people think property is unfair. In their worry about losing their privileges, some wealthy people ask the Church to keep the poor from wanting more, but this request is seen as unfair. The Church should not support unfair systems that hurt most people. In the end, socialist ideas cannot be stopped by force or authority because these forces often support socialism. Most people today do not believe in capitalism and want a fairer sharing of wealth and happiness.
§ 3 the Battle of Ideas
The failure of Socialist experiments does not disprove Socialism itself; instead, it highlights the differences in how facts are interpreted. Supporters of Socialism blame private property for societal issues and continue to believe in its potential to solve those problems. They often disregard the failures of their system, focusing instead on blaming Capitalism. In contrast, Capitalism and Liberalism rely on logical reasoning and appeal to rational thought, while Socialism often stirs emotions, which can give it a temporary advantage in swaying public opinion, especially among those who may not think critically.
However, the belief that public opinion and mass psychology shape dominant ideas is overestimated. Although the masses may not think deeply, they look to intellectual leaders who guide them. Socialism’s prominence arises not from mass thought but from the ideas of a small group of thinkers who have influenced society. If these intellectuals were to abandon Socialism, its influence would diminish. Society is fundamentally shaped by ideas rather than material conditions.
Liberalism recognizes the interconnectedness of social institutions, while Socialism tends to focus on individual issues in isolation. Critics within Liberalism often adopt a Socialistic viewpoint by trying to fix perceived problems without understanding the systemic consequences. They mistakenly argue that Socialism is a noble ideal that could work if humanity were morally superior, but this is flawed reasoning. The ability to calculate and rationally manage an economy is essential for any sustainable system, a quality that Socialism lacks. Ultimately, if people stop believing that Socialism will improve their welfare, its support will fade.