This topic is one which really gets my attention due to two reasons: poverty and inequality have been my favourite topics to write about for General Paper in my Junior College days, and I have always been interested political ideology.
I must admit that the readings contained a lot of information that I was stunned upon knowing. I used to think that Communism was an ideology that did not make sense, until I realized that even Karl Marx believed that Communism was not for every country, but only those which have already flourished under capitalism.
This has led me to wonder how different the world would be if the communist ideology actually became the predominant one in countries which Marx felt communism would flourish in. After I went through my readings, I found that the line that was particularly stuck in my mind was: “Everything the communists told us about communism was a lie. Unfortunately, everything they told us about capitalism was true”. I do acknowledge that capitalism ultimately triumphed over communism to due the merits that its system holds – more than the communist system would, at the very least, but I would just like to explore how the world would turn out to be had we adapted communist ideology on a worldwide scale.
What would have entailed would be the abolishment of class. Businesses would become state-owned, and wealth would be redistributed from the rich to the poor. If communism was brought about through revolts from the poor, it would ultimately be brought down – if it has not already caused the system it is operating within to implode – through revolts from those unwilling to give up their wealth.
This then brings us to the question: will equality and equity necessarily make the world a better place? The world has not been fair and equal for as long as it has existed, and I personally feel that trying to change this may just upset many other things in the process – for example, the rich in a particular country with a progressive tax system (especially in countries with high taxes like Denmark) will definitely be less than happy to see their hard-earned money being taxed away. Extremely high taxes may result in disincentive to work, and this would then upset the economy of a country.
I would also like to talk about the modernization and dependency theories. Even though they are extreme opposites of each other, I feel that both theories are right. However, one thesis of the dependency theory that I do not agree with personally is that the underdeveloped conditions of a poor nation stems from colonialism, which has brought about the exploitation of the nation.
While it may be true that corporations from rich nations have exploited poor nations which were rich in natural resources, the usage of cheaper labour in these usually over-populated countries may not be blatant exploitation of human resources, if at all. Outsourcing production into these poorer nations actually lead to the creation of jobs. While one may argue that exploitation of the resources of poor nations (in this case inexpensive labour) has been perpetuated, I personally feel that it may be justified. In these poor countries, the cost of living is relatively low, and with the creation of jobs, these companies are actually benefitting the people, providing them with enough income to get by – a change from when unemployment would be even more rampant without the corporations outsourcing production into their country.
Also, while some may accuse rich nations of exploiting the poorer nations by mercilessly stripping them of their natural resources, they may have failed to consider the nation’s vent for surplus. If their natural resources were left untouched, would these resource-rich nations have properly utilized them? They could have been better off exporting these resources to these richer countries, albeit at a less exploitative rate.
Ideology & equality
Advertisement
