Of individualistic indifference and collective hatred
As a young boy I was raised in a socialistic family in which values of sharing, interdependence and community contribution where empathized. I remember my good uncle bringing home books and articles on Lenin, Trotsky, Mikhail Gorbachev and the mighty Union Of Soviet Socialist Republic(USSR). USSR was the dream country for me. Then I went to college and embraced the values of independent thinking and personal development and motivation enshrined in the capitalistic ideology of the western world. My college buddies avoided any talk on Jack Welsh or GE because that led to yours truly preaching to them why Jack Welch was the best thing to happen to the corporate world.
Socialism:Collective Hatred
Personally i feel, taken in a temperate way, socialism is a noble way of living aimed at reducing injustices created by a class hierarchies in society. It is about sharing this world and contributing significantly to a community you belong to. On the other hand to extremists, socialism is epitomized by a collective hatred of the “rich” by the “poor”. As a young socialist I believed that being rich is satanic and I was a favorite of Robin Hood’s “steal from the rich and give to the poor” theme and the story of Jesse James in the movie American Outlaws. True socialism then meant hating the rich and having nothing to do with these greedy bastards, a collective effort by the poor to hate and fight the rich .
Capitalism: Individualistic Indifference
When I went to college I was exposed to ways in which capitalistic men, mostly from America, had challenged widely held beliefs and changed the world. Examples include self-made billionaires like Andrew Carnegie and recently Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. Whilst in college I was lucky to join a group of fired up entrepreneurs in a group called The Success Club that was inspired by Jonah Mungoshi’s Success Coach articles in Fingaz. If the club had to have a handibook it had to be Rich Dad, Poor Dad by Robert Kiyosaki or Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill. Our goal was to share resources like books, tapes etc on personal development and wealth generation.
A recent and closer look at the model of capitalism-USA has led me to conlude that at the extreme negative capitalism is about personal gratification, a focus on personal enrichment without stopping to think about the poor man because the poor man is generally lazy. The assumption is wealth is entirely a question of choice and the poor man is poor because he chose poverty promoting ways. One just doesn’t care about what the next man does; on the extreme end its about individualistic indifference.
Tax and US Presidential Elections
Rich Dad, Poor Dad is an excellent book that brings out fascinating facts on how one can chart their way to riches. One of the valid arguments thrown in the book is how at some point the US government had lost it by taxing the rich more than the poor. From this I learnt that in ‘ideal economic conditions’, individual and societal growth is consequential of a carrot-and-stick policy of taxing the poor more than the rich. This, in ‘ideal conditions’, works because everyone will strive for riches and as they go up the wealth ladder they pay less and less tax. The carrot is the sweetest of wealth and the stick is the pain of poverty. Analysing events in our model of capitalism, the US, reveals that the argument poised by Rich Dad, though valid, is almost unimplementable because ‘ideal economic conditions’ will never exist in this world due, in part, to social injustices.
The McCCain-Obama US elections campaigns reflect the general thinking of the main positions of politically oriented groups, the left-wing and the right-wing. McCain’s tax policy is aimed at cutting tax for the rich (cut top corporate tax from 35% to 25%, cut top real estate tax from 45% to 15%). Obama’s tax policy on the other hand favors the low to middle class (tax credits of up to $500 to $1000 to poor families and annual college tuition tax credit to $4,000 for students willing to perform 100 hours of community service after graduation). As capitalistic as I’ve become I favour Obama’s policy (not because of the color of his skin) but because it promotes people to work hard in their communities particularly the tuition credits. Its like a mixture of capitalism and socialism, you are allowed pursue your educational desires but you have to contribute to the well-being of the person next to you through community work. It is optional I suppose but in a true carrot-stick approach.
The point is Rich Dad, Poor Dad, which is very capitalistic, is very factual through and through but it is incomplete; it leaves out the ecological nature of life.
Both Extremes Never Work
Capitalism has generally edged socialism as seen by the disintegration of the once mighty USSR and the fall of the Berlin Wall and on one hand the economic might of the US and European countries. Socialism failed, in part, because the Cold War polarized the East into seeing every action of the West as driven by the desire to make more money. They never appreciated the good that capitalistic system offered like individual thinking which fuels innovation and the power of capital in stimulating economic growth. Both Russia and China seem to have realised their mistakes and are slowly embracing the role of capital in society. The umbrella hatred of the ways of the capitalist seem to be fading in the previously socialistic countries like Libya and to some extent Cuba. I hope the policies of these countries recognize that allowing individuals to pursue their own endeavors is not bad but stimulates innovation and that collective hatred of the capitalists blinds them to the good the capitalists does.
However of late there has been a general dislike of US foreign policies because a lot argue that Washington only cares about its economic benefits especially in war-ravaged nations such as Iraq. This is one of the reasons why terrorism is on the increase, a good example being the unfortunate events of 9/11. I hope the US recognises that though independent thinking and survival is essential there is a higher virtue called interdependence, and most of US policies reflect some caring for the neighbournext to you and have a genuine desire to share the wealth in this world. Not caring about the welfare of the next person, individualistic indifference, is sure recipe for disgruntlement among those not benefitting fully from the capitalistic system.
Related Articles
Give me a Random Article
Comments
5 Responses to “Of individualistic indifference and collective hatred”
Trackbacks
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You know Solomon you make some insightful and important points here the 2 extremes indeed do not work. Sometimes you find that people are bound to their ideology pretty much in a dogmatic way. It’s either ‘I’m right’ or ‘I’m right’. In my own development as an entrepreneur and venture capitalist I’ve realised that when one examines the African social and economic context you need an extra set of tools than the ’standard’ capitalist tools you find in the Rich Dad, Bill Gates toolkit. One, Africans need to be more ambitious simply because the challenges are greater, we HAVE to become global competitors FASTER and against deeply entrenched incumbents (e.g. if you want to start an auto company you are up against GM, Daimler, Toyota etc; and it’s the same in any industry you care to think of). Secondly, the support system/ ecology for African entrepreneurs is non-existent unlike any of the capitalist heroes you’ve mentioned, here you start from a negative position. Thirdly, as Shingairai mentioned in a post here, African entrepreneurs HAVE to bring Ubuntu to the table. In the States you can be selfish and succeed, here you can’t have that attitude because it’s impossible to be truly successful in a sea of poverty. Finally, I think we need to adopt as Mandela taught us the concept of governance and leadership by consensus. Consensus unlike democracy is not about seeking a majority but seeking agreement by ALL. If everyone buys into an idea then their buyin and uptake of the idea is much more committed than when they don’t agree and simply are carrying out an order. Indeed consensus is a higher standard for leadership but it’s possible.
@Brian:”One, Africans need to be more ambitious simply because the challenges are greater, we HAVE to become global competitors FASTER and against deeply entrenched incumbents”
I think some of us are very ambitious but mostly out of context. A good
idea/ambition needs to be supported by good systems and structures,
(as you correctly state) to stand out and to be sustainable in the long
term.
One of these structures include R&D. many of us think R&D is a cost
centre. Once sum1 sets a a good business with an excellent business
model we tend to copy the lifestyle of the western guys who probably
would hav inspired the business in the first place and with time
continues to make profit but the balance sheet hardly growing because
we wont plough back the profits through but rather flying to watch to F1
and English Premier League for example. An investment company run by two
young men that went bust when we had our financial crisis comes to mind
Ambition can be put out of context when the environment does not support it.
Before we even get to R&D, how about an economy that works well enough for you to be able to map a business strategy? How about a banking system that can give entrepreneurs loans? How about reliable electricity supply to power factories and data centres?
Therefore if I have an ambition to compete with Google, it becomes irrelevant if I don’t even have an internet connection. Thus is much of the ambition in Africa. We are inspired by global entrepreneurs but the shortcomings of our situation leads to many ideological abortions.
These shortcomings need not arrest our ambition- but are worth acknowledging to put our initiatives into perspective and to help us plan better.
I guess you are right James we cant even talk of R&D for someone who is starting up. But when I mentioned R&D I was referring to someone who already has his “small business” already up-and-running. In fact R&D is just one example of re-investing. My point was we need the extra discipline to set-up structures to reinvest back into the business and R&D is just one such area.
Yes we need a conducive environment like electricity, internet connection etc but I feel ambition should never be constrained by current conditions, its just dreaming, anyone can do it whether you in US, Ethopia or Zim. Anyway i thought these ambitions are done in the spirit that business people will be able to influence the creation of an environment that supports our capitalistic ambitions no wonder I cited US, which is a model of capitalism.
I was hoping someone would also talk of the socialistic requirements of our continent for i think they are just as important as our capitalistic dreams.
Guys all of you are right. Now we need to see how to make all these ideas work for us. Why is it we have institutions and structures that do not work when they worked just fine for those we inherited them from? Brian’s call for Ubuntu and consensus become relevant here and Somon’s call for discipline becomes pertinent.
And isn’t ambition also about overcoming the constraints that would make R & D seem unattainable?The resources both human and material are here- with the right structures, institutions, mindset and a culture of ploughing back in a conducive environment can be created.
But as long as there is gratuitous plunder, a flair for consumption without production, a rabid desire for flamboyant lifestyles without the necessary vision to build (as opposed to wanton destruction) then we will continue to be the richest content (resource- wise) but the poorest- except for only a handful…