Socialism VS Human Nature

Now that we're experiencing capitalism at its most developed and worst ever stage, I and many others find it strange that there's not a lot more opposition against it. Here's a short post about why that may be the case.

There are a lot of arguments embedded in our culture, public discourse and educational systems, that speak for capitalism being the most successful socioeconomic arrangement. There's the argument that capitalism spurs on technology because of competition. It's said that under the free market consumers benefit from rising quality and lower prices, again as a result from competition. If you're a regular here you'll know that this is just one of the many persistent lies about capitalism, as in fact this all leads to the planned obsolescence that's now ubiquitous; products aren't made to last, but to break down so customers keep coming back for more, as not competition but profit maximization is capitalism's main driver.

Many times it's simply asserted that capitalism "just works" in an effort to summarize all of its many preconceived benefits. Well, if that's the case, if you believe that to be true, just remember that capitalism is a global economy now and that more than half the planet's population lives on or below any realistic poverty line. It may "work" for you, but if it fails to accommodate for the majority of the rest of the world, it's a stretch to claim that it "just works." Capitalism motivates people to want to work harder; that's another misconception about this economy. And the opposite is also believed without discussion, namely that systems without the profit-motive, or systems that provide people with the basic needs to live a decent live, would transform people into lazy lazy leeches. Mind you, these arguments are merely asserted without any evidence, and often evidence to the contrary.

I believe that much of this can be explained by looking at one big underlying assumption about capitalism, which is that this system, ideology or whatever you want to call it, however imperfect, most closely aligns with "human nature." For this argument to be valid we must provide two things: 1) we must assume that there's even a thing called "human nature," and 2) we must define what "human nature" is.

Human nature is a concept that denotes the fundamental dispositions and characteristics—including ways of thinking, feeling, and acting—that humans are said to have naturally.
_{source: Wikipedia}

So, the first question that comes to mind is this: is "human nature" static and unchanging, or does it develop and change over time? Anyone who claims to be serious will have to say that the latter is true. People who claim that our ethics and morals stem from some holy scripture may disagree at first, but they'll eventually have to admit that whatever behaviour we found acceptable in ages way past isn't acceptable anymore. Beliefs inform actions and our beliefs change over time. That's true historically and within the scope of an individual lifespan. In fact, when you think about it people can be made to believe just about anything. If you think that this isn't true for our must fundamental instincts, think about suicide-bombers who forfeit or disregard their most basic survival instinct because of some higher belief.

We talk and think about capitalism as if it's always been here. Capitalism has hijacked our conscious and subconscious beliefs to the extent that we literally can't even imagine a world without it. Mark Fisher called it "Capitalist Realism":

Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? is a 2009 book by British theorist Mark Fisher. It explores Fisher's concept of "capitalist realism", which he takes to describe "the widespread sense that not only is capitalism the only viable political and economic system, but also that it is now impossible even to imagine a coherent alternative to it."

The book investigates what Fisher describes as the widespread effects of neoliberal ideology on popular culture, work, education, and mental health in contemporary society.
_{source: Wikipedia}

According to Fisher, the quotation "it is easier to imagine an end to the world than an end to capitalism", attributed to both Fredric Jameson and Slavoj Žižek, encompasses the essence of capitalist realism. I tend to agree strongly with this; capitalism not only rules our external world, but our internal world as well. As such it's easy to forget that we're a social species, that our tribal roots knew nothing even slightly resembling capitalism, that we were strictly egalitarian primitive communists. I also believe that much of the apparent unhappiness in modern society stems from the contradictions between what capitalism asks from us and our nature as social creatures; we're not supposed to live alone, by ourselves, in a constant and brutal competition with our fellow tribes-members. The fact that we do is in my opinion just another example of how easy we're made to believe anything at all...

Anyhow, watch the below linked video; it tries to make the case that socialism isn't incompatible with human nature, contrary to what most of us have been made to believe through our education and in our culture.

Thanks so much for visiting my blog and reading my posts dear reader, I appreciate that a lot :-) If you like my content, please consider leaving a comment, upvote or resteem. I'll be back here tomorrow and sincerely hope you'll join me. Until then, stay safe, stay healthy!