Capitalism destroys, and it’s socialism that saves capitalism
Sweden has eight political parties. Only one party is, so to speak, skeptical of capitalism. By that I mean that they are sceptical (like climate skeptics are skeptical about global warming) that all production must be under private auspices, and that many private producers should be protected by limited liability and enjoy legal personhood. I am in that party.
These are my highly personal thoughts: I am amazed at the many Facebook posts in Sweden that believe in capitalism as something opposite to, and better than, socialism. In practice, capitalism is destroying the level of education, making energy too expensive, and deteriorating health — which in turn undermines the conditions for companies to flourish.
As I see it, capitalism needs socialism to deliver the conditions for functioning businesses. This includes well-educated workers, functioning transportation and roads, safety, healthy and strong employees, stable, public contracts and a clean environment.
Not to forget offering a safety net for privately owned companies:
limited liability, bankruptcy, unemployment insurance, health insurance, export guarantees, establishment support, less tax on capital gains, etc.
Not just that, society needs resilience. We know from experience that when the situation changes (pandemic, flood) that privately-owned companies are ill-equipped to act quickly and broadly. A joint preparedness is needed. In Sweden many companies received lock-down compensation from the government. This insurance can be called socialism for private companies.
We also know from experience that corporations cannot be trusted to do their own internal control without robust follow-up. For example, we have a lot of evidence that forest owners cut down large areas that should be protected by law as they house endangered species. In many areas habitat diversity in the forest is close to zero. It has to stop.
Let us do that thought experiment — allowing private companies to just get on with everything. As I see it, if capitalism is applied too hard in a society, society will stop working. These companies will undermine the very conditions they need to function. Socialism is actually a prerequisite for capitalism, private companies participating in an open market, to function.
The basis for a well-functioning business life and prosperity is a well-functioning municipality. We need our local services.
Some principles:
• Services that everyone needs: water, energy, housing, schools, roads, sewers, childcare, elderly care etc etc should be under robust public control.
• I would add food there…..
• Control of internal controls must be solid.
And you don’t have to use the words socialism because it is only the blue-eyed who do NOT understand this other side of capitalism. (They are usually not found among local politicians who are too close to reality.) All the talk from the right about getting Sweden in order is nothing more than increasing the conditions for private companies to create more disorder. Keep that in mind when they come at you posturing that they are going to “put things in order”.
Capitalism vs socialism is like a battle between darkness and light. Darkness knows it will never win over light because if it does, it will destroy itself. We see it now. When energy prices rise, the business models of all other production and distribution chains are destroyed. What is good for capitalism is cheap, reliable, continuous energy and a governemtn to bail you out with your business continuity in mind.
Not just that — every CEO know that they run on reliable and cheap energy supply, concrete, wood, labour, local transport and support for the workforce. These were all pillars of the old social democratic plan for Sweden: give companies the opportunity to innovate and grow, and take as taxes from their profits to pay back to keep the conditions for the business stable.
Globalism undermined the Swedish model. The Swedish federation of trade of industry decided it would do better to join th eglobal race, press down wages and use the benefits of gloabl trade regardless of the effects on the home country. It is about to undermine itself, as excess profits are made from what should be supporting the rest of society’s prosperity. Starved of bsics of business, Swedish industry will fail. We are seeing a similar effect in Germany where long-standing, prosperous German firms are closing due to high energy prices.
Corporate profits globally are falling generally . If it continues, it will not be worthwhile to run a privately-owned company anymore (without creating a monopoly — or similar conditions).
We on the left need to think deeply: it will fail badly. People might lean towards fascism. We need to have alternatives ready to roll out. What are they? How do we see the possibilities when business as usual doesn’t work?
How do we see opportunities to take tough measures against monopoly and oligopoly formation and depletion of basic needs?
How can we talk about the downsides of free enterprise when it comes to the service and products that we consider belong to a modern basic standard?
To me, the left needs to represent the people in driving a deal with hard constraints: if free enterprises want the privilege of manufacturing in the nation, selling to and employing the people of the nation, and they want the conditions for profitability handed on a plate, then they should be staunch supporters of the general good and common basic services. If they do not agree to this, then there is little hope for society to progress with capitalism and we might as well aim for public ownership of the means of production — it does not have to be centralised — but it needs to be democratic.
