Socialism leads to the politicization of society. Hardly
anything can be worse for the production of wealth.
Socialism, at least its Marxist version, says its goal is
complete equality. The Marxists observe that once you allow private property in
the means of production, you allow differences. If I own resource A, then you
do not own it and our relationship toward resource A becomes different and
unequal. By abolishing private property in the means of production with one
stroke, say the Marxists, everyone becomes co-owner of everything. This
reflects everyone’s equal standing as a human being.
The reality is much different. Declaring everyone a co-owner of
everything only nominally solves differences in ownership. It does not solve
the real underlying problem: there remain differences in the power to
control what is done with resources.
In capitalism, the person who owns a resource can also control
what is done with it. In a socialized economy, this isn’t true because there is
no longer any owner. Nonetheless the problem of control remains. Who is going
to decide what is to be done with what? Under socialism, there is only one way:
people settle their disagreements over the control of property by superimposing
one will upon another. As long as there are differences, people will settle
them through political means.
If people want to improve
their income under socialism they have to move toward a more highly valued
position in the hierarchy of caretakers. That takes political talent.
Under such a system, people
will have to spend less time and effort developing their productive skills and
more time and effort improving their political talents.
As people shift out of
their roles as producers and users of resources, we find that their
personalities change. They no longer cultivate the ability to anticipate
situations of scarcity to take up productive opportunities, to be aware of
technological possibilities, to anticipate changes in consumer demand, and to
develop strategies of marketing. They no longer have to be able to initiate, to
work, and to respond to the needs of others.
Instead, people develop
the ability to assemble public support for their own position and opinion
through means of persuasion, demagoguery, and intrigue, through promises,
bribes, and threats. Different people rise to the top under socialism than
under capitalism. The higher on the socialist hierarchy you look, the more you
will find people who are too incompetent to do the job they are supposed to do.
It is no hindrance in a
caretaker politician’s career to be dumb, indolent, inefficient, and uncaring.
He only needs superior political skills. This too contributes to the
impoverishment of society.
The United States is not fully
socialized, but already we see the disastrous effects of a politicized society
as our own politicians continue to encroach on the rights of private property
owners. All the impoverishing effects of socialism are with us in the U.S.:
reduced levels of investment and saving, the misallocation of resources, the
over-utilization and vandalization of factors of production, and the inferior
quality of products and services. And these are only tastes of life under total
socialism.
[Excerpted
from Why Socialism Must Fail, published in The
Free Market Reader.]
Hans-Hermann
Hoppe [send him
mail] is distinguished fellow at the Mises Institute and
founder and president of the Property and Freedom Society. His books
include Democracy: The God That Failed and The Myth of National Defense. Visit his website.
