Alright, so several days ago, I stumbled across a blog-post/rant written by an Australian "pundit" on politics - Byron Bayh Jr, entitled "ten things I hate about the left". Let me start by stating I thought I was going to cry I was laughing so hard, and let me finish by summing it all up in a single word: Bullshit. over the next ten posts, I'm going to dismantle each and every accusation, for your own enjoyment
Accuastion 1. The left hate success.
This is the all-time biggie. People on the left have a problem with people making money and being successful. They want everybody to be poor and miserable. This is why they want everybody to start living 'modestly' and why Obama told people to work more hours rather than see a 'friend lose their job'. This is also why they hate profit - if a business is successful and makes a profit, the left are the first ones to force them to stop due to "climate change" (see below).
Alright. Hold on. Stop right there. We don't have a problem with people making money; we have a problem with people being greedy, arrogant, self-serving bastards - which is (coincidentally enough) what many who advocate "supply-side" are (ie the entire Chicago School, the Heritage Foundation, etc), at least according to the Bureau of Labour. In Europe, the average CEO makes 16 to 18 times what their blue-collar workers make. Alright, fair enough. Odds are, they've worked longer and harder than their newer workers. Ergo, they deserve at least somewhat more. In the UK, this is slightly higher, weighing in at 21 times. In the United States, the standard CEO makes 411 TIMES what their blue-collar workers make. Is it just me, or does this sound a tad bit on the excessive side? The United States - the supposed bastion of Capitalism, also has one of the highest income inequalities in the developed world. According to the UN-Gini rating, the United States rests at 40.8, nestled in between Senegal (per capita income of under $1,000) and Turkmenistan (per capita income that is 1/47th that of the United States).
Now, onto dealing with the other accusations. Supposedly, us leftists want everyone to be "poor and miserable". Tell that to Norway, tied for 1st on the UN Human Development Index, with the highest GDP-Per-Capita in the world. Guess us leftists just love poverty that much.
As for the businesses and profits, that one should be bleeding obvious. Let us, for example, take a look at the largest company in the world: Exxon Mobil, with average annual profits exceeding $40,000,000,000. In the process of making this vast profit, they've been accused of human rights abuses in countries such as Indonesia, Senegal, Nigeria, Chad, Saudi-Arabia, Uzbekistan, Ecuador, Colombia, Bolivia, and Brazil. Nike, the most notorious sweatshop user on the planet, pays their workers an average of 13 cents per hour to earn its massive profits. Does that make profit? you betcha. Is that good? NO! Not when it was made by trampling over human rights laws and supporting paramilitary death-squads slaughtering union organizers (as Exxon did in Colombia in 2003).
Let's look at another example: Royal Dutch Shell. According to CorpWatch, the Energy giant has been fined more times for violating environmental laws than any other company in the world in the last 15 years (whether that's legit or not is subject to speculation, as Monsanto and Exxon got away with all kinds of things they probably should have been fined for), and records annual profits approaching 30 billion.
Given the gross human rights violations, horrific abuse of the environment, and near enslavement of its workers, what's not to hate about profit?
That's all for part one. The accusations will just get more wild and consistently stupider as we go. Buckle up everyone; parts 2 through 9 to follow.
Ebook , by Autumn Reed
6 years ago
3 comments:
Gotta love it.
The typical right-wing criticism is usually a turn on the old line, "Capitalism promotes wealth for the few while socialism promotes poverty for everyone." As you point out, it's not necessarily so, citing Norway.
More on your note about the States: they are preaching capitalism but practicing government handouts--but only for the entitled few at the top, which could be summarized as anti-socialism, put the emphasis where you like. As someone said, "No bank left unbailed."
in reality, the rich are very socialist. they think the government should give them money. My last year's history teacher, Fayaz Chagani, summed the ideology of modern capitalism up as "Socialism for the rich, Capitalism for the poor"
Have to disagree with you on two points (although I think the person you're responding to is a complete fool as well.)
Using Norway as an example of prosperity from socialism is disingeuous, as it's a nation of 5 million people living near a large amount of oil and gas deposits; for all extents and purposes, it's a European equivalent of a Gulf sheikdom. Its natural wealth allows it to support a welfare state; the welfare state doesn't create the nation's wealth. There are plenty of welfare states that have big economic problems in Europe.
And on sweatshops, the simple fact is that every single developed economy in the world today (Western included) has used "sweatshops" as a means of economic development. Many of these developing nations have only cheap labour as a resource. That's why I find anti-sweatshop activists so funny; their ideals are killing more people than they're saving.
Post a Comment