I have always abstained from labeling myself a capitalist or a socialist. Most Indians my age have witnessed both paradigms growing up, from a more socialist approach till the early 90s, to a more capitalist strategy since then.
More recently, socialism and its close cousin communism have, for the most part, been driven to the fringes in India. But to many, like myself, choosing between capitalism and socialism is now becoming more complex, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The ills of capitalism and seduction of socialism
If you’re paying attention to the status quo, chances are that you have an inkling that something is not quite right in the prevailing system. You may not be able to pinpoint the perils, but they are there: Mass unemployment, widespread inequalities, discriminatory policies, etc. And when confronted with this reality, many of look at successful social democracies like Denmark and Sweden, and cannot help but feel “what-if”. I certainly find myself entertaining the thought, from time to time.
Am I right to flirt with the idea of a socialist economy? If so, which model do I prefer, in the wide socialist spectrum between Scandinavia and China?
While China is a socialist state, its market economy is decidedly capitalist. This distinct model has worked wonders for China. But this shouldn’t blind us from the fact that China’s socialist/communist governance has taken a toll on its people. It has promised prosperity, in exchange for freedom. As an ardent believer in democracy and personal freedoms, I am naturally averse to the Chinese approach.
The other example that we are considering, and which I often see advanced, are Scandinavian nations. While I admire the hybrid model of social democracy with free-market capitalism, which these nations have evolved, I am aware that it depends majorly on a high taxation regime, to enable such high welfare spending.
In a nation like India, where only a little over 1% of the total population pay taxes, such a model is unthinkable. In fact, most of the world would find it very difficult to enforce such a national economy, without significant backlash.
Balance is the way forward
So, by-the-book socialism is not something that I find entirely without its issues. Like any dogmatic approach, it repeatedly results in economic crises of the sort that were common in the eastern bloc of the Cold War era.
At the same time, socialism has its positives, as evident from how socialist economies managed the pandemic. Hands-on state control can help mount a better challenge against adversities and can ensure that crisis response is implemented effectively. Even outright capitalist economies like the US are now exploring socialist-like education and healthcare policies. Personally, I find that this more holistic approach resonates with me.
If the last century was a social experiment, then capitalism can be said to have won – in its contest with socialism. However, I have never been one to look at the world in simply binary choices. As a matter of fact, I detest making the simplistic choice between capitalism and socialism. I refuse to see the world, and the way human society creates the greatest good for the greatest number, as a black and white choice between the two camps.
I see what some look down upon as the ‘grey areas’, as the cross-pollinated overlap of the two ideologies. It’s this combined approach, which makes most sense to me. I can see the advantages of both systems, and believe that we need to explore how implementing the best of both worlds, can be used to benefit humanity. You could say that I adopt soft socialism on selective issues, with a safety net anchored in capitalism. So, in the capitalist-versus-socialist identity, it seems like “both” would probably fit me best!
