The centuries-long socio-economic and political discussion about the best system for human thriving has often pitted socialism against capitalism and vice versa. The advocates of socialism argue that humans are inherently socialist, capable, and willing to participate in a system that emphasizes equality and community. However, capitalism advocates appeal to the logic of the most dominant market system that appeals to each individual's self-interests. Two scholars that have prominently defended either system more recently are G.A. Cohen in Why Not Socialism? and Jason Brennan in Why Not Capitalism? According to Cohen, it is not that socialism is bad, but people are not good enough. However, the harrowing history of socialism is almost an anathema in most modern societies because of its consequences. Countries that adopted socialism were ruled by dictators and ridden with poverty, while capitalist states became some of the richest. Brennan responds to Cohen's short book, arguing that capitalism is the best system under the current circumstances. The comparison and contrast between these systems reveal that while both have their advantages and disadvantages, capitalism is superior because it works and can accommodate some of the socialist positive aspirations if well structured. I will argue that capitalism is superior to socialism because the former aligns with reality while the latter can only work in an idealistic society.
In Why Not Socialism? Cohen argues (outside historical context) that socialism is morally superior to capitalism because it appeals to human aspiration for the highest good. He utilizes the "camping trip" metaphor to illustrate the overarching idea of egalitarianism and community in an inherently socialist human society. This socialist vision captures the aspiration of a just society to appeal to the logical processes of his critics. The proponent argues that on such a trip, everyone aims to "have a good time," and to achieve this, they are willing to share whatever "facilities" based on the prevailing circumstances for mutually beneficial activities (Cohen 3). He argues that governments can adopt a similar system to evolve a just socialist coexistence. Although Brennan is willing to concede to the aspiration for a just society, he criticizes Cohen for ignoring history and philosophical problems of human nature (Brennan 6). Brennan argues that since human nature is not entirely determined by genetics or instincts but is a social construct, capitalism has vindicated itself as the most appropriate system under the current circumstances. He also criticizes Cohen for arguing why socialism is possible instead of illustrating that it is desirable. Brennan argues that the hypothetical camping trip experiment is not consistent with the existing crop of human beings under any economic system (8). Therefore, while Cohen believes that society should be organized around socialist principles of egalitarianism and community, Brennan refutes their practicality and consistency with reality.
Capitalism is right because, while the common premise of Cohen's argument is that capitalist societies block the expression of inherent generosity, Brennan argues that it only supports the pre-existing philosophically verifiable assumption of the selfishness of human nature. Cohen's premise in the camping trip metaphor that people are more likely to share their skills and resources is flawed and aspirational. Capitalism is practical and desirable both in a utopian world and in the literal world because it leverages the motivation of self-interest. Capitalism is more social than a socialist system because it ensures everyone gets what they deserve (Brennan 9). In a capitalist society, individual self-interest incentivizes them to develop innovative products and services. Appealing to human generosity is only an incentive in an ideal community because countries that have tried it have already failed. According to Brennan, capitalistic societies have become richer, while communist countries that experimented with socialism are poorer (2). This situation could be associated with the fact that socialism requires people to work hard for the sake of others. Therefore, capitalism is right because it provides the proper incentives to create wealth and improve general wellbeing.
Brennan's argument in Why Not Capitalism? is more plausible because it aligns with human nature and reality than Cohen's argument, which relies on hypothetical idealization representing misplaced aspirations. If we agree with Cohen's assumption that human nature is inherently good, then capitalism would still be the best system capable of dealing with its moral flaws. Brennan uses a parallel "Mickey Mouse Village" illustration to simulate idealized capitalism (73). The village operates under voluntary community, mutual respect, reciprocity, social justice, and beneficence principles. This idealized capitalism would produce a far superior society than the once conceived under Cohen's camping trip idealization. However, a rejoinder has been made about capitalism being grievously selfish and morally uninspiring. Although this criticism is valid because selfishness is the best human aspiration, socialism has also produced its share of dictators, meaning that socialism only works in utopia. However, a counter-argument for this rejoinder argues that real-world socialism does not align with Cohen's principle of community. As such, some would argue that socialism offers a solution to capitalism's selfishness. Nevertheless, capitalism can present the opportunity for integrating the community through government intervention in the market. Ultimately, capitalism is already demonstrably better because it incentivizes initiative and rewards individuals based on self-sustaining market forces.
In conclusion, Brennan's argument for capitalism is more plausible and desirable because it is consistent with reality and human nature than Cohen's idealized socialism. Capitalism also has the best potential for achieving the socialist aspiration of a just and fair society. Works Cited
Brennan, Jason. Why Not Capitalism? New York; London, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2014.
Cohen, G A. Why Not Socialism? Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2009.